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.

 

Bible Answers to Member Questions

page: 16
13
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by DrChuck
 


Jesus was a mumza; he may had been legally the "social" son of Joseph but he was not the biological son of Joseph and thats the bottom line. You can fluff it up all you like but thats fact. Jesus did NOT decend from the House of David simply because he was not blood related. To the high priests of Jerusalem then and the rabbis of present times, they don't agree with you.

Now can someone tell me what Jesus did between the age of 13 and 30?



i think this does a good job of explaining some things



there are parts i disagree with, however.
edit on 22-3-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by KJV1611

Originally posted by Theophorus
reply to post by KJV1611
 

Can God make an object so heavy he is unable to lift it?
I know this sounds like an odd question, but if you (or anyone) could please answer this I would appreciate it. Thanks
edit on 22-3-2011 by Theophorus because: (no reason given)


I have heard this one a many of times. The premise is to try and question if God is omnipotent. The answer is, he could make a object that heavy, but then only he could left it. And on and on we could go...next.


The question was, could he make an object so heavy he is unable to lift it? This is not a question in regards to the omnipotent nature of God. The question I posed is a contradiction of terms. God can not make an object so heavy he is unable to lift it. It would go against his own universal laws. I asked this in hopes that if you really knew bible answers you would know this simple elementary question about God. You did not....
edit on 22-3-2011 by Theophorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
So what you are saying is.....

those who have not sinned can cast the first stone....I don't think that applies to Mr KJV

I am most comfortable with my own beliefs; but this is all too confusing.

I'm sure what Jesus actually preached was nice and all but from what I'm reading here from Mr KJV, he is not exactly making me warm and furry inside.


Ah, but remember Mr. KJV believes if you follow Christ you go to hell.


Originally posted by KJV1611
If you followed Jesus's teachings in these passages, you would end up in hell when you died just like the rich man in Luke 16.


That would make him the first OPENLY Anti-Christ Christian I have yet to meet.

So just know the source.



With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


part of the problem we are all suffering from here, is that the entirety of the information is NOT available to us. jesus mentions this, the scribes and pharisees hid important data from the people. there's nothing to suggest that particular wrong has yet to be corrected. as a result, it seems a good thing to ask in prayer for revelation of the missing information.
edit on 22-3-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


part of the problem we are all suffering from here, is that the entirety of the information is NOT available to us. jesus mentions this, the scribes and pharisees hid important data from the people. there's nothing to suggest that particular wrong has yet to be corrected. as a result, it seems a good thing to ask in prayer for revelation of the missing information.
edit on 22-3-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)


All the information you need is there bro... you just have to know who or what you're looking for.


edit on 22-3-2011 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


part of the problem we are all suffering from here, is that the entirety of the information is NOT available to us. jesus mentions this, the scribes and pharisees hid important data from the people. there's nothing to suggest that particular wrong has yet to be corrected. as a result, it seems a good thing to ask in prayer for revelation of the missing information.
edit on 22-3-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)


All the information you need is there bro... you just have to know who you're looking for



i'm a sis. and i agree there are huge chunks of data that are not readily apparent, and that require real study (and prayer) to comprehend. but sadly, some of the data is STILL hidden from all of us who go solely by the text, and refrain from requesting further revelation from god.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 



it seems a good thing to ask in prayer for revelation of the missing information.


I don't wish to be rude by 'butting' in in any way however, I could not resist. This is precisely Gods intent. God wants us to use our intellect and put the pieces together. Hence -religion

edit on 22-3-2011 by Theophorus because: (no reason given)


If we knew everything there was to know, what would be the point? (we would be like Gods..lol)
edit on 22-3-2011 by Theophorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:27 PM
link   
an example of my previous post: virgin birth doesn't necessarily mean the person had never had sex. it can also mean that the person did not have sex in order to be impregnated ------> artificial insemination, in other words.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Theophorus
 


no problem.
could you elaborate on your statement?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


part of the problem we are all suffering from here, is that the entirety of the information is NOT available to us. jesus mentions this, the scribes and pharisees hid important data from the people. there's nothing to suggest that particular wrong has yet to be corrected. as a result, it seems a good thing to ask in prayer for revelation of the missing information.
edit on 22-3-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)


All the information you need is there bro... you just have to know who you're looking for



i'm a sis. and i agree there are huge chunks of data that are not readily apparent, and that require real study (and prayer) to comprehend. but sadly, some of the data is STILL hidden from all of us who go solely by the text, and refrain from requesting further revelation from god.


I appoligize hun...


perhaps you should look at what was left out of what we have now?

reluctant-messenger.com...

scroll down theres links to many of them....




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


I was just agreeing with what was said.Perhaps maybe the most intelligent thing Ive read all night.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Theophorus
 



God wants us to use our intellect and put the pieces together...


As i've said above...

reluctant-messenger.com...

heres some more pieces...




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
an example of my previous post: virgin birth doesn't necessarily mean the person had never had sex. it can also mean that the person did not have sex in order to be impregnated ------> artificial insemination, in other words.


I been waiting for quite a while for someone to mention the virgin birth so I could offer this alternative way of looking at it.

This is my view on the "Virgin" Birth idea.

Why are virgins held in higher regard than any other woman? Because they abstained from having sex? Is sex a bad thing? Wasn't the second commandment after "Don't eat the fruit" go forth and multiply?

Perhaps our values are skewed. Maybe the idea of the "Virgin" birth was simply the way they viewed Mary for having such a divinely inspired Son. Maybe we should value all of our women as much as we do virgins. Without sex, without giving birth, without the cycle of life, mankind would be no more.

I view all women as pure and as virgins.

Imagine if Muslims did this too. Those 70 virgins they are dying for are right here in Heaven, they just do not see them that way. It is their Mothers, Sisters, Aunts, and Grand Mothers.

With Love,

Your Brother
edit on 22-3-2011 by IAMIAM because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


i have a few theories on pre-adamite time on the planet earth, based in large part, on the text itself.. (we need to learn to differentiate between the land earth and the planet earth, where the text is discussing either one. a lack of preciseness on this particular subject leads people to assume things the text simply doesn't say).

i don't believe cro-magnon, neandethral and other "Cave men" were our fore runners. i believe this planet was inhabited by a race of a beings we've come to know as angels, before the adam were created, and that they were not ape men but rather reptilian-mammalians and amphibian-mammalians. the biological similarities our mammalian flesh bodies share with them is part of the confusion on this subject.

there was a race of angels called "seraphim" in the biblical text. seraphim is plural for seraph and seraph is:

8314 saraph saw-rawf' from 8313; burning, i.e. (figuratively) poisonous (serpent); specifically, a saraph or symbolical creature (from their copper color):--fiery (serpent), seraph.

www.eliyah.com...

since some of those "serpents" were clearly still in god's favor, even though a rather infamous "serpent" was not, it suggests data was hidden from us as regards this particular race of angels. if this was their planet before homo sapians ever came here, the earth was definitely present before the adam race arrived on the scene.

i think the real argument as regards evolution vs. creationism is: IF sentient beings can inadventently arise from random events.


edit on 22-3-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


No offense Akragon, But did you happen to read the disclaimer at the bottom of the page. Sorry, but I don't subscribe to metaphysical theology. To much room for error



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Akragon
 


i have a few theories on pre-adamite time on the planet earth, based in large part, on the text itself.. (we need to learn to differentiate between the land earth and the planet earth, where the text is discussing either one. a lack of preciseness on this particular subject leads people to assume things the text simply doesn't say).

i don't believe cro-magnon, neandethral and other "Cave men" were our fore runners. i believe this planet was inhabited by a race of a beings we've come to know as angels, before the adam were created, and that they were not ape men but rather reptilian-mammalians and amphibian-mammalians. the biological similarities our mammalian flesh bodies share with them is part of the confusion on this subject.

there was a race of angels called "seraphim" in the biblical text. seraphim is plural for seraph and seraph is:

8314 saraph saw-rawf' from 8313; burning, i.e. (figuratively) poisonous (serpent); specifically, a saraph or symbolical creature (from their copper color):--fiery (serpent), seraph.

since some of those "serpents" were clearly still in god's favor, even though a rather infamous "serpent" was not, it suggests data was hidden from us as regards this particular race of angels. if this was their planet before homo sapians ever came here, the earth was definitely present before the adam race arrived on the scene.

i think the real argument as regards evolution vs. creationism is: IF sentient beings can inadventently arise from random events.

edit on 22-3-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)


And you are free to believe what you will my friend, this discussion is about "Bible Answers to Member Questions" i was mearly adding to the puzzle we have here



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Theophorus
reply to post by Akragon
 


No offense Akragon, But did you happen to read the disclaimer at the bottom of the page. Sorry, but I don't subscribe to metaphysical theology. To much room for error


None taken, it was just for informational purposes




posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by DrChuck
 


Jesus was a mumza; he may had been legally the "social" son of Joseph but he was not the biological son of Joseph and thats the bottom line. You can fluff it up all you like but thats fact. Jesus did NOT decend from the House of David simply because he was not blood related. To the high priests of Jerusalem then and the rabbis of present times, they don't agree with you.


I didn't make the laws man. Whether or not the high priest of ancient times agree, well thats something neither you or I will ever know.


Now can someone tell me what Jesus did between the age of 13 and 30?



Thats a question thats been on my mind for a long time. I know it wasn't solely directed at me, however it is an intriguing subject. I've read that He made trips to the east in India or Tibet, or that He was just working as a carpenter with His father. There is much to be speculated on the life of Jesus since there are no records of His life other than His childhood.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by DrChuck
 



Thats a question thats been on my mind for a long time. I know it wasn't solely directed at me, however it is an intriguing subject. I've read that He made trips to the east in India or Tibet, or that He was just working as a carpenter with His father. There is much to be speculated on the life of Jesus since there are no records of His life other than His childhood.


The lost years...

reluctant-messenger.com...




posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Theophorus

Originally posted by KJV1611

Originally posted by Theophorus
reply to post by KJV1611
 

Can God make an object so heavy he is unable to lift it?
I know this sounds like an odd question, but if you (or anyone) could please answer this I would appreciate it. Thanks
edit on 22-3-2011 by Theophorus because: (no reason given)


I have heard this one a many of times. The premise is to try and question if God is omnipotent. The answer is, he could make a object that heavy, but then only he could left it. And on and on we could go...next.


The question was, could he make an object so heavy he is unable to lift it? This is not a question in regards to the omnipotent nature of God. The question I posed is a contradiction of terms. God can not make an object so heavy he is unable to lift it. It would go against his own universal laws. I asked this in hopes that if you really knew bible answers you would know this simple elementary question about God. You did not....
edit on 22-3-2011 by Theophorus because: (no reason given)


I think God can make an object that He cannot lift, if He chooses to do so. There are things that God cannot do due to His divine nature, such as lying. If He chooses to make an object that even He cannot lift then He can. The inability to move an object that God Himself decided to make immovable even to Him, does not equate to being non-omnipotent. God can accomplish anything that He so desires, and if making an object that even He can't budge is His goal then it will be done.

My point is, if God decided to make an object that even He cannot move and is able to move it, then He failed.
edit on 23-3-2011 by DrChuck because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join