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.

 

Did the Christians lie about Jesus Resurrection? Jesus did not die by Crucifiction!

page: 17
6
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 



Nothing i don't know already... My point being... Hell... is a myth designed to scare people into conversion...


Hell doesn't scare people who are unconverted, it was meant to scare Catholics into "towing the line" of the church. God's love leads us to repentance, not His wrath. I never gave a crap about hell before I was converted, and now the only crap I give about it is I don't want anyone to go there.

If the word "Hell" freaks you out substitute it with "fiery furnace" or "lake of fire", whatever term you prefer in it's stead. Don't get all hung up on semantics, you DO NOT want to go there. And Christ taught 3 times more about "that ugly place" than He ever did about heaven.


edit on 10-4-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Can anyone provide a valid answer to the post that I made prior to this one? I'm curious to see how people will interpret this.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   
It does appear that the Holly Roller community has been trying to pass off bogus information on the clear liquid from Jesus allegidly showing he was dead. Even to the point of using bogus doctor's opinions, who were not there to see the wounds or the damage factors, this making their opinion rather worthless.

In fact, these various opinions omitted the most important factors that would easily explain a clear liquid.

At hand is the clear issue that Jesus was whipped severely and this would leave massive torso burn marks that would fill with lymph fluid under the skin, much as a blister from a friction burn.

If anyone poked through the skin there would be large amounts of this clear liquid run out along with some blood.

The Plausible Finding is that Jesus was alive, the clear liquid was lymph fluid from under the skin whipping stripes on the torso, and the blood flowing would mean he is still living.


More Bogus Dramatized Non-sense from the organized Church Balogna tossers, which rejects the grinder. imho



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by XxForgottenLegendxX
 


I'll giver a try...


1. Why did not the Prophets before Jesus call to this notion of original sin?


Perhaps they didn't know any better?


2. Did they lie when they said that it was enough to Worship One God and obey His commandments to achieve Paradise?


How is that a lie?


3. Why did not God come and free humanity from sin at the time of Adam so that the righteous and others would not be in Hell due to his sin?


Adam was a myth... as is Hell...


4. Why are infants, humanity before Jesus, and others who have not heard about Christianity, held accountable for a sin they never committed, nor have knowledge about how to remit themselves from it?



Children are innocent until they learn not to be....

14But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.




posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by XxForgottenLegendxX
Can anyone provide a valid answer to the post that I made prior to this one? I'm curious to see how people will interpret this.


It is mostly because the organized Church gang don't have a logical answer and you got them cornered.


The Essene considered Heaven to be on Earth, and the Babylon and others thought it was in the sky. So, depending on the context, when Eve ate the poison apple this ended the time of Heaven or Eden on Earth.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


The simulation hypothesis actually makes sense when you connect it with God, and realize that God is the "simulator", not some advanced sect of alien ET's...

Good stuff.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Just gotta say - Adam cannot be a myth. If Adam (mankind) was a myth, we (mankind) would not exist.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



If the word "Hell" freaks you out substitute it with "fiery furnace" or "lake of fire", whatever term you prefer in it's stead. Don't get all hung up on semantics, you DO NOT want to go there. And Christ taught 3 times more about "that ugly place" than He ever did about heaven.


It doesn't freak me out in the least.... the very notion is silly... and illogical from a "Just God" POV...

No reason to be afraid of something that doesn't exist...




posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iason321
reply to post by Akragon
 


Just gotta say - Adam cannot be a myth. If Adam (mankind) was a myth, we (mankind) would not exist.


How silly. Might wanna read the Africa origin of human science.


www.trussel.com...


edit on 10-4-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Enlightenment



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
I usually receive answers that either completely dodge the question, or in an ignorant sense. Not to say anyone here is ignorant, just wondering if there are even answers for those questions. Like the user a few posts above, it seems as if it's a corner that cannot be avoided.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iason321
reply to post by Akragon
 


Just gotta say - Adam cannot be a myth. If Adam (mankind) was a myth, we (mankind) would not exist.


The Adam myth also assumes he was the FIRST... which is impossible... And that the earth is only 6k years old, which makes no sense... and also impossible all things considered...

But you're free to believe what you will




posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by XxForgottenLegendxX
I usually receive answers that either completely dodge the question, or in an ignorant sense. Not to say anyone here is ignorant, just wondering if there are even answers for those questions. Like the user a few posts above, it seems as if it's a corner that cannot be avoided.


Perhaps i missed the question...




posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



If the word "Hell" freaks you out substitute it with "fiery furnace" or "lake of fire", whatever term you prefer in it's stead. Don't get all hung up on semantics, you DO NOT want to go there. And Christ taught 3 times more about "that ugly place" than He ever did about heaven.


It doesn't freak me out in the least.... the very notion is silly... and illogical from a "Just God" POV...

No reason to be afraid of something that doesn't exist...



Eternal separation from Him and His kingdom exists, it's real. And remember, there are many different dimensions/ or levels of this place commonly referred to as "Hell" in a general term. He said it would be "more" tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah than for Capernaum. So that means there must be a dimensionality for it to be "less" tolerable. There are many different compartamentalizations to the "outer darkness" if you will, the fallen angels who sinned in Genesis 6 and right after the flood are reserved in chains in a specific part called "Tartaroo", (the Abyss/Pit), there are some morally good folks awaiting final judgment in plain darkness, and there are evil wicked people reserved in flames awaiting judgment.

But there will come day after judgment when all of the dead unsaved will be thrown into the lake of fire. All that stuff is very bad, even the outer darkness dimensionality. However on the flip side, there is only one Kingdom of Heaven, only one Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, and one way to spend our eternal life with God.

Just as there are many mansions and rewards for faithfulness in heaven, there are many levels of punishment in the other place. Point being our conduct matters here, we must love, for God is Love.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


It appears you did not understand what I was saying.

I did not refer to Adam as he, personally, I would refer to adam as they.

Adam = mankind
Adam != a man




posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iason321
reply to post by Akragon
 


It appears you did not understand what I was saying.

I did not refer to Adam as he, personally, I would refer to adam as they.

Adam = mankind
Adam != a man



I believe the bible refers to a specific line of geneology... Adam...was the first... and his line spread throughout the earth....

Thats an interesting twist... its not supported by scripture though...




posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by XxForgottenLegendxX
I usually receive answers that either completely dodge the question, or in an ignorant sense. Not to say anyone here is ignorant, just wondering if there are even answers for those questions. Like the user a few posts above, it seems as if it's a corner that cannot be avoided.


I answered question 1. And I don't mean offense, but it's an irrelevant question because "Original Sin" doctrine is false from which it arises from my good man. And I'd be more than happy to answer any question you have, and if I don't know I'll tell you that and look for an answer. Remember, you may ask 99 people a questions and all will have wrong answers that do not satisfy your curiosity or they will say "I don't know", but that doesn't mean there isn't an answer that will satisfy you that the 100th man may possess.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


No, it's not the mainstream Christian belief, but there are several branches of Creationism that take this stance.

Check out www.biologos.org

I can give you a few other sources that have entire websites dedicated to explaining Genesis from a OEC / Theistic Evolutionist perspective....

YEC is not the only creationism!
edit on 4/10/2012 by Iason321 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iason321
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


The simulation hypothesis actually makes sense when you connect it with God, and realize that God is the "simulator", not some advanced sect of alien ET's...

Good stuff.


And remarkably this comes from secular science!!!!



edit on 10-4-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 



It does appear that the Holly Roller community has been trying to pass off bogus information on the clear liquid from Jesus allegidly showing he was dead.


That came from a non-Christian Pathologist, your rebuttal however came from Jew who wasn't qualified to make the diagnosis seeing as he was a Pediatric Gastroenterologist.

Massive fail Luciferian.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


You did not understand what I was saying either.

Forget the word Adam, it's obvious whenever I say that you picture some guy walking around named Adam.

Mankind would not exist, had mankind not been created.

There, now it makes sense, right?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join