Difficulty understanding God

Originally posted by milkyway12
Thinking? If you do not believe the bible then it doesnt matter what we are thinking.

The Christian God is based off the Bible , the sword of Truth. You Deny it.

That is correct, I do deny much of what it says, in the same manner you would deny any other ancient writings about their gods.

All you have for truth is feelings, faith, and ancient writings. The same can be said of most other belief systems. All of them think they have the truth. They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong.

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by UndesirableNo1

 

The concept of reincarnation is completely without foundation in the Bible, which clearly tells us that we die once and then face judgment (Hebrews 9:27).

I think reincarnation is in the Bible. I mentioned in another post what Christ said about it, in a cryptic way. Christ also said the thief on the cross "you will be with me this day in paradise," but remember, you can be in the presence of the Lord after death, and still chose to be reborn with God's permission. Look at John the Baptist/Elijah the Prophet. Jesus knew John was the soul of Elijah, just not the body. The Jew's were looking for a body so they never believed Elijah returned. Remember, Jesus says "I go to prepare a place for you." We're not reaping our reward or punishment yet till judgement day. God revamps things, like creating a heaven where you can't revolt, and a new earth where "the lion lays down with the lamb," and a new Israel/Jerusalem "like a bride."

Originally posted by milkyway12
Im pretty sure the bible tells you not to rely on your own understanding and im pretty sure it tells you , you will be decieved if you do

So, what understanding do I rely on? Yours?

reply to post by UndesirableNo1

Your not so pose to understand God. You must just marvel at its glory.

reply to post by Hydroman



If you do not believe the Bible , then the Christian God is already denied , because you dont get to him but through Jesus , mentioned in the Bible ... the entire new covenant.


If you were a Christian for 20 years , the Holy spirit would have directed you. You probably were not a Christian.

reply to post by Hydroman


Yes, according to the Old Testament in the book of Genesis, angels had physical bodies and had sex with women, "the sons of God saw the daughters of man as beautiful, and they took unto them wives." Fallen angels mixing their blood with humans was considered an abomination. Also, the angels were burning with lust, and lust is also a no-no in the Bible. Angels also clearly bore a distinct appearance, often referred to as "men" wearing "robes of light." Yet it seems the angels in Heaven have rules, because when someone asked Jesus if a man was married to several wives, which would be his wife in heave, Jesus responded none of them, because "they will be like the angels, which do not marry."

reply to post by UndesirableNo1


You mean the Fallen Angels? Angels can manifest , they do not have flesh and bone in their true form. They were also unholy at this time cast out of heaven and the stones of fire for pride and supporting Satan.

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by UndesirableNo1

 

You mean the Fallen Angels? Angels can manifest , they do not have flesh and bone in their true form.

edit on 04/30/2011 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)

The fallen angels had sex with human beings. In the Bible it mentions angels as both sexual beings, invisible beings (only the donkey could see, but not the rider), and changlings, "entertain angels in disguise."

reply to post by UndesirableNo1


All angels are masculine , if you see a Female Angel , it is a demon manifested in a ... disguise.

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by UndesirableNo1

 

All angels are masculine , if you see a Female Angel , it is a demon manifested in a ... disguise.

........What? Right out of left field, there.

reply to post by UndesirableNo1


What are you talking about? You said Angels are Male and Female , they are not.

In the Bible it mentions angels as both sexual beings,

Originally posted by milkyway12
If you were a Christian for 20 years , the Holy spirit would have directed you. You probably were not a Christian.

I have been told that many times. It is a mean trick your god pulled on me by allowing me to live in another country other than my own for over 2 years doing voluntary work with drug addicts in his name, and the whole time I wasn't a christian. I wish he would have let me know at some point so I could have corrected that.

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by UndesirableNo1

 

What are you talking about? You said Angels are Male and Female , they are not.

In the Bible it mentions angels as both sexual beings,

edit on 04/30/2011 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)

You miss-read something. It says in the Bible "the Sons of God went unto the Daughters of Man." The male angels had sex with human women in Genesis. It doesn't mention female angels in the Bible to my knowledge, but if the male angels had penises, wouldn't be too farfetched to think their could be female angels. Doesn't make them "in disguise."

Originally posted by UndesirableNo1
Yes, according to the Old Testament in the book of Genesis, angels had physical bodies and had sex with women, "the sons of God saw the daughters of man as beautiful, and they took unto them wives." Fallen angels mixing their blood with humans was considered an abomination. Also, the angels were burning with lust, and lust is also a no-no in the Bible.

So, angels are human, as their dna is compatible with ours to allow reproduction between us and them. I didn't know this. Next, they must be able to reproduce with each other since they have reproductive organs. If they can't, why did god give them reproductive organs?

reply to post by UndesirableNo1


Nope , rarely do i use my imagination on the word of God unless its the things we will be doing when we finally get to heaven.

So if Angels (Women) arnt in the Bible , then there must not be any female angels , but the bible tells us Angels are Masuline.

reply to post by Hydroman


Let us create man in our image? Just because you have a Penis doesnt mean you have to use it.

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by UndesirableNo1
Yes, according to the Old Testament in the book of Genesis, angels had physical bodies and had sex with women, "the sons of God saw the daughters of man as beautiful, and they took unto them wives." Fallen angels mixing their blood with humans was considered an abomination. Also, the angels were burning with lust, and lust is also a no-no in the Bible.

So, angels are human, as their dna is compatible with ours to allow reproduction between us and them. I didn't know this. Next, they must be able to reproduce with each other since they have reproductive organs. If they can't, why did god give them reproductive organs?

Nah, I wouldn't say angels are human, or humans are angels, just similar qualities.

reply to post by UndesirableNo1


It is no surprise that you have questions concerning the bible. The bible was not created by god, it was created by men with motives other than spiritual. The bible does not make literal sense, and if read for a literal interpretation, it would leave one dumbfounded.

reply to post by vjr1113


The Creator is not subject to the concept of injustice, because this concept only applies to something that has a judge or an owner, or in other words, something that has restricted rights. The Creator, however, is eternal without a beginning, and is the true owner of absolutely everything, as is the Creator of everything. If someone said, it would be injustice (or "evil") if Aļļaah did so and so, then he has actually appointed himself as a judge of the Creator. How is that for arrogance? It is absurd to posit that The Creator is evil because of such and such, because The Creator owns everything, and you must accept this premise if you even want to make your argument.

Originally posted by UndesirableNo1

Originally posted by SavedOne

But, there are those who believe "Hell" is simply "separation from God".

I use to think this makes sense, but if God created the Universe, is everywhere, and omnipotent, there is no realm in God's universe that exists outside of God's universe. God would have created the plane of Hell. It could not mean separation from God, but it does say in the Bible that the suffering in Hell can look up and see the saved in Heaven.

Well you make an excellent point, perhaps the concept of omnipresence does not mean that God is "physically" everywhere so much as "aware" of everywhere. In other words, while He is aware of Hell and everything going on there, that doesn't mean He is actively interacting with the entitities in Hell. I think it's the same with omniscience, the fact that He knows all things does not mean that He is controlling all things (IE, even though He knows our actions we still have free will and control our actions). Regarding the second part of your comment, I assume you're talking about the rich man in Hell being able to see Lazarus? Lazarus was not in Heaven though. He was in "Paradise" (also called "Abraham's Bosom" in the OT) which was a compartment of Hades just as Hell (Abbadon) is. Paradise and Hell are separated by some kind of chasm that can be seen across, but cannot be crossed. All the saved before Christ went to Paradise rather than Heaven, because it is only through Christ that anyone can be with God. When Christ died, before He was resurrected he went to Paradise and removed the saved and took them to Heaven (Paradise is now empty). The Bible is silent on whether those in Heaven can see those in Hell, we don't know. We also don't know if those in Heaven can see events/ people on earth. I like to think so, but we're not told.

Originally posted by UndesirableNo1
I can understand this, God allows Satan to strengthen our faith, and if we ask for help, God will always open a window as escape. It says in the Bible God doesn't temp us, so it's Satan. It's just hard to understand God allows Satan to tempt people, because sometimes they don't reach the other side with their faith. Look at suicide. I know that's not God's plan.

The Catholics think suicide is a ticket straight to Hell, but in fact there's no indication of that in the Bible. I agree with you that life is God's plan rather than death, but I don't think suicide condemns a person.

Originally posted by UndesirableNo1
I'd be careful about claiming Holy books are inaccurate in terms of their gods, considering they're the "guidelines." ;] Remember, people consider the Bible God's word.

And I think "guidelines" is the perfect word. I think people get way too tripped up on what the "Bible" is, they see it as God's finger writing on paper and that it is 100% from God's lips, inerrant, etc. Yet even the most cursory study of its history reveals that men decided what would and would not be included, what format it should take, how to interpret certain words into English, etc. etc. I think we can all agree that God is not the author of confusion, yet people will absolutely come to blows over different interpretations, so how does one reconcile that? If God is not the author of confusion, how can He have authored a document over which so much confusion exists? I do believe that God inspired the Bible, but it seems pretty clear to me that men wrote it and that their biases crept into it (as politically distasteful as that may be to accept). I've come to this conclusion after many years of believing it was 100% inerrant and acting as an apologist for years as well. It wasn't a conclusion I accepted easily.