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.

 

Would a loving Jesus or God wait this long before reappearing?

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by TupacShakur
 


Same page friend.

Regards
DL




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by mysticnoon
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



Would a loving Jesus or God wait this long before reappearing?
Would he continue to allow a new holocaust every year?


What exactly do you propose God should do if He were to appear?

God is supposedly within everyone of us, yet we do not hear his voice. What makes you think we would pay attention if God appeared somewhere in the world among us?



You could ignore some water walking flying dude and ignore whatever he was saying?
Hmm.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
I have often wondered about what people call "God." I too think the whole religion thing, and by that I mean any religion that follows a "book." I believe strongly that the Romans wrote the New Testament, every bit of it, and no doubt made most of the stories up as they went along. As for Yesuah, at last count there were 16 of them, and not a one was a God, and not a one started a religion, or inspired a book. Link

A very wise woman said to me, when I was but a child...."if that which you seek cannot be found inside.... it will never be found outside." Well, I found the Father and Mother deep inside, and got to know them very well. I know they are not the Ultimate Divinity, but they have a connection to the Ultimate Divinity. I realized that everyone of humanity are Gods, and Goddesses in their own right, you are all in training down here on Earth. Humanity will have to Ascend through several lower dimensions before coming even close to the Divine.


How Gnostic.
And correct.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Theophorus
 


If you ever get your head out of god's ass, we will talk.

Thanks for explaining the Christian beliefs but you should remember that there are many different Christian sects and they are all at each others throat.

You can keep your genocidal maniac. I have moved past that anti-Christ.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
God actually anticipated this objection and had Peter write bout it explicitly,


“The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. ” (2 Pe 3:9)


Jesus hinted at his long absence in his parables. The parable about the bride (the church) and the bridegroom is an example,


“As the bridegroom was delayed, they all became drowsy and slept. ” (Mt 25:5)


By the looks of things it will not be much longer.


Only if you ignore Jesus saying that the time of the end was at hand.

Good cherry picking though on your part.

Does God get his wish that none perish or is his will somehow thwarted?
If he gets his wish, and a miracle working super God always would, does that mean that there is no hell.
After all, if all are saved, what would God need with a hell.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



If you ever get your head out of god's ass, we will talk.
Humm, its quite strange you would say something like that not really knowing my beliefs and or those beliefs of Christians in general.Fact is God is not a christian concept per -se, hes a human concept, and all humans are 'hard-wired' intellectually to philosophize.Whats a better concept to use our intellect on than God?
To say that my head is up Gods ass, is a oxymoron in the least.Your smarter than that.


Thanks for explaining the Christian beliefs but you should remember that there are many different Christian sects and they are all at each others throat.
Sure, there are countless denominations with relatively small differences however, you should remember that (or I should tell you) what we are only concerned here with Trinitarian and non-trinitarian.My personal belief would be that non-trinitarians are not christian.And there's really only a handful of those.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


You wrote:

[" Atheists can thus have a God without it being an insult, as well as all other peoples."]

In which case it would be suitable to find another word, as there's quite a few people sneaking their theism in through the backdoor, once the word 'god' is established as a generally acceptable term (a term on their terms ofcourse).

Quote: ["I suggest that God and Jesus are progressively less good and more cruel, over time, if he or they do not reappear. That would be immoral and God cannot be immoral."]

Why can't the concept 'God' not be immoral? I mean apart from circular reasoning.

Quote: [" That confirms to my mind, that reading Jesus as an archetype, is the right way to read scripture. Otherwise, Jesus and or God, are shown to be immoral constructs."]

I will go further and even cut down the character in the gospels, known as Jesus, ONLY to be a construct. 'Archetypes' is similarly a construct, at best presented as a hypothesis.

Quote: [" I suggest that God and or Jesus, real or not, have broken their covenant with mankind."]

I would suggest the 'real or not' perspective to include 'covenants' also.

Quote: ["God is dead.
Thank God, God is dead.
Long live God.

God as defined as a set of rules that is, thus all benefit as secularism leads the way to better rules.

God became the Word. The word is Secular."]

I'm uncertain on your position and direction with this, but considering the excessive semantic shufflings presented by theists, a reasonable first step would be to use a language fitting for secularism instead of adopting/adapting theistic terms.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



You could ignore some water walking flying dude and ignore whatever he was saying?
Hmm.


Yes, I would definitely ignore someone who flaunts their power over physical laws to try and impress the public.

If God were to "appear" simultaneously to everyone in the world, I speculate that it would be more in the form of a personal epiphany, a realization from within oneself of whatever God wishes to be understood. However, each individual mind would also need to be receptive to such an epiphany, and as we are all at varying degrees of receptiveness, I doubt such a worldwide event would ever happen.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by mysticnoon
 


Well said



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Theophorus
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



If you ever get your head out of god's ass, we will talk.
Humm, its quite strange you would say something like that not really knowing my beliefs and or those beliefs of Christians in general.Fact is God is not a christian concept per -se, hes a human concept, and all humans are 'hard-wired' intellectually to philosophize.Whats a better concept to use our intellect on than God?
To say that my head is up Gods ass, is a oxymoron in the least.Your smarter than that.


Thanks for explaining the Christian beliefs but you should remember that there are many different Christian sects and they are all at each others throat.
Sure, there are countless denominations with relatively small differences however, you should remember that (or I should tell you) what we are only concerned here with Trinitarian and non-trinitarian.My personal belief would be that non-trinitarians are not christian.And there's really only a handful of those.


Then there are only a handful of intelligent Christians.

Originally Posted by animefan48
Well, the reality is most Christians do buy into the trinity doctrine because of persecution of the early Gnostics and non-Trinitarians, and the religious councils were dissenters were forced to agree to a Trinitarian theology. Many Unitarian and Universalist theologies argue that when Jesus said he was the way, he meant that he was an example of how to live to be united/reunited with God. As for the name, God does give other names for himself including the Alpha and Omega, as well as some believe a name that should not be written (or even spoken I believe). Honestly, I think using the name I Am That I Am would just be confusing and convoluted, seriously. I seriously do not believe that it is a continuation of Gnostic/mystical/Unitarian suppression. Even the Gnostic and mystical traditions within Islam and Christianity do not tend to use that name, and among the 99 Names of Allah, I did not find that one. Also, many Rastafarians believe that the Holy Spirit lives in humans and will sometimes say I and I instead of we, yet they don't seem to use the name I Am for God/Jah either, so I really don't think it can be related to suppressing mystical and Gnostic interpretations. I think that originally oppressing those ideas and decreeing them heretical are quite enough, the early Church did such a good job that after the split many Protestant groups continued to condemn mystical and later Gnostic sects and theologies.

Yup, the bishops voted and it was settled for all time!!1 (Some say the preliminary votes were 150 something to 140 something in favor of the trinity)

But then Constantine stepped in: After a prolonged and inconclusive debate, the impatient Constantine intervened to force an end to the conflict by demanding the adoption of the creed. The vote was taken under threat of exile for any who did not support the decision favored by Constantine. (And later, they fully endorsed the trinity idea when it all happened again at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, where only Trinitarians were invited to attend. Surprise! They also managed to carry a vote in favor of the Trinity.)

home.pacific.net.au...

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


“Why can't the concept 'God' not be immoral? I mean apart from circular reasoning.”

Just from traditional thinking. Christians do not even think that his use of genocide is evil or immoral. A stupid notion but they maintain it.

“a reasonable first step would be to use a language fitting for secularism instead of adopting/adapting theistic terms.”

Absolutely, if I was in a secularist forum I would. I am in a religious one thus God is quite well understood.

That word, God, may eventually cross the floor into secular thinking if religionists ever stop making it a catch all word for all imaginary attributes and a wish list of all their hopes and dreams. That is what through the search for a true God in the first place.

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by mysticnoon
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



You could ignore some water walking flying dude and ignore whatever he was saying?
Hmm.


Yes, I would definitely ignore someone who flaunts their power over physical laws to try and impress the public.

If God were to "appear" simultaneously to everyone in the world, I speculate that it would be more in the form of a personal epiphany, a realization from within oneself of whatever God wishes to be understood. However, each individual mind would also need to be receptive to such an epiphany, and as we are all at varying degrees of receptiveness, I doubt such a worldwide event would ever happen.


Good for you but I think that you would be there with your hand out the same way most would be.

Regards
DL
edit on 23-3-2011 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



Good for you but I think that you would be there with your hand out the same way most would be


How could a soul be anything but humble in the presence of God?



posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by mysticnoon
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



Good for you but I think that you would be there with your hand out the same way most would be


How could a soul be anything but humble in the presence of God?



If it is O T God we are talking about, how could a soul be anything but disgusted with such a genocidal maniac?

Regards
DL



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



Just from traditional thinking. Christians do not even think that his use of genocide is evil or immoral. A stupid notion but they maintain it.


On what basis do you claim it is immoral? Are you saying there are objective moral values?



posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 





Only if you ignore Jesus saying that the time of the end was at hand. Good cherry picking though on your part.


Not really... you would have to give me the example you are referring to there are few that are misunderstood.


Does God get his wish that none perish or is his will somehow thwarted? If he gets his wish, and a miracle working super God always would, does that mean that there is no hell. After all, if all are saved, what would God need with a hell.


God created us to be moral agents not robots. The fact that God wishes or wills that all people should be saved does not necessarily imply that all will respond to the gospel and be saved. We must certainly distinguish between what God would like to see happen and what he actually does will to happen. It is clear in scripture that only a few will be saved and the majority will go to hell. But ultimately that is up to you. "because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." (Ro 10:9)



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



Just from traditional thinking. Christians do not even think that his use of genocide is evil or immoral. A stupid notion but they maintain it.


On what basis do you claim it is immoral? Are you saying there are objective moral values?


On the basis that it is better to grant life than death.

I am saying that it is immoral for a God to kill when it is just as easy for him to cure those he thinks defective.
Especially if he, as Bible god does, professes to love the one's he is killing. Murdering, if like me, you do not see how small children and babies could deserve to have their lives ended.

Regards
DL



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



Just from traditional thinking. Christians do not even think that his use of genocide is evil or immoral. A stupid notion but they maintain it.


On what basis do you claim it is immoral? Are you saying there are objective moral values?


On the basis that it is better to grant life than death.

I am saying that it is immoral for a God to kill when it is just as easy for him to cure those he thinks defective.
Especially if he, as Bible god does, professes to love the one's he is killing. Murdering, if like me, you do not see how small children and babies could deserve to have their lives ended.

Regards
DL


God didn't write the bible my friend....men with agendas did.

God has no reason to kill anyone, this is just lack of understanding honestly




posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by Greatest I am
 





Only if you ignore Jesus saying that the time of the end was at hand. Good cherry picking though on your part.


Not really... you would have to give me the example you are referring to there are few that are misunderstood.


Does God get his wish that none perish or is his will somehow thwarted? If he gets his wish, and a miracle working super God always would, does that mean that there is no hell. After all, if all are saved, what would God need with a hell.


God created us to be moral agents not robots. The fact that God wishes or wills that all people should be saved does not necessarily imply that all will respond to the gospel and be saved. We must certainly distinguish between what God would like to see happen and what he actually does will to happen. It is clear in scripture that only a few will be saved and the majority will go to hell. But ultimately that is up to you. "because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." (Ro 10:9)


Well. Do things my way or burn forever gives us 0 wiggle room so I would say God wants slaves or robots.

As to Jesus. Do you really think God would think that a plan is perfect that includes his sending his son to be murdered?
Is the God you follow that insane?

www.youtube.com...

Regards
DL



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



Just from traditional thinking. Christians do not even think that his use of genocide is evil or immoral. A stupid notion but they maintain it.


On what basis do you claim it is immoral? Are you saying there are objective moral values?


On the basis that it is better to grant life than death.

I am saying that it is immoral for a God to kill when it is just as easy for him to cure those he thinks defective.
Especially if he, as Bible god does, professes to love the one's he is killing. Murdering, if like me, you do not see how small children and babies could deserve to have their lives ended.

Regards
DL


God didn't write the bible my friend....men with agendas did.

God has no reason to kill anyone, this is just lack of understanding honestly



I agree. All that is said of God has been from man.

Regards
DL



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join