What is the point of Christianity?

reply to post by windword


Carlton Pearson is probably the worst person you could possibly refer to in regards to Christian doctrine.

Here is him getting owned in a Nightline debate:



If you listen to his comments he's much more New Age mysticism than Biblical Christianity.

Originally posted by AccusedNut

Originally posted by micmerci

Originally posted by AccusedNut
reply to post by micmerci

 

A typical response from a religious person. Gods plan states that he knows the time you are born and the time you ill die. Showing that murderers and rapists are completely blameless. They are puppets acting out this plan. Tell me how that makes sense?
Also show me scientific evidence that any of what you speak exists, bible passages do not count as evidence.

A typical response from an uninformed and ignorant person. (See, the barbs can go both ways) Your argument is skewed and invalid. In one breath you use biblical references to show that God's plan is flawed and in the very next breath you state that I cannot use scripture to defend my position. Which is it?

Fair argument. I like the standard assertion of how I'm the ignorant one just because I don't hold the same beliefs that beliefs that you do. If I had a nickel for every time I've been called ignorant by a religious person I'd be rich. But that's beside the point. Arguing over religion is like arguing with a stop sign. You'll never get anywhere.

Ignorance about a subject doesn't mean you're stupid, just not well studied up on the subject. I'm ignorant to Molecular Biology, it's because I've never taken a course on it, not because I failed a course in it.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

Nope.

And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come,"

The text clearly states that speaking against Jesus is forgivable. In otherwords, not believing in Jesus is a forgivable sin.

I can shout from the rooftops that Jesus didn't die on the cross for our sins, and really, really mean it. If i'm wrong, I'll still be forgiven.

What is the Holy Spirit? I have my own definition. If I tell you what I believe the HS to be, and tell you that I live by that belief and hold it dear to my heart, and you speak against my HS, does that mean you will not be forgiven by god, because you don't agree with me as who or what the Holy Spirit actually is?

It doesn't say that. It says he who blasphemes the Holy Spirit. Rejecting His call to Christ throughout one's entire life is the ultimate blasphemy of Him. Christ already paid for your sins, all you need to do is repent and trust Him and the revelation the Holy Spirit gives to all men about Him.

reply to post by micmerci

The term ignorant does not mean "stupid" or even "wrong" nor is it meant to be an insult. It just means that one has not become informed in that particular area. My statement has nothing to do with our difference in beliefs but it has everything to do with you incorrectly stating the stipulations of God's plan. I am not even speaking of it being incorrect in light of my interpretation. Your statement does not even fit into any of the standard arguments for or against.

Well, technically if someone calls another person "ignorant" is is an insult, it's a general claim of ignorance. That's why it's important to say, "you're a person who is ignorant to X" rahter than to say, "You're ignorant." But what you say is true, when specifying what they are ignorant to it's not an insult, it's saying "You don't know what you're talking about in regards to that."

People who find the term ignorant offensive are people who are ignorant to the definition of ignorance.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


I beg to differ with you reaction to Carlton Pearson's doctrine. I don't see any evidence of him getting "owned" by anyone in that series of videos. I do think that he and Deepac Chopra defended their views very elegantly. While I don't totally agree with Carlton Pearson, I do admire all that he has gone through for his faith and all that he stands for.

reply to post by windword

Could it be the same deity or were a race of dragon like entities inhabiting our planet.

I think it was a race of them, myself.

Quetzalcoatl is a Mesoamerican deity whose name comes from the Nahuatl language and has the meaning of "feather-serpent".

The worship of a feathered serpent deity is first documented in Teotihuacan in the Late Preclassic through the Early Classic period (400 BCE - 600CE) of Mesoamerican chronology - "Teotihuacan arose as a new religious center in the Mexican Highland, around the time of Christ..." -- whereafter it appears to have spread throughout Mesoamerica by the Late Classic (600 - 900 CE) (Ringle et al.).

In the Postclassic period (900 - 1519 CE) the worship of the feathered serpent deity was centered in the central Mexican religious center of Cholula. It is in this period that the deity is known to have been named "Quetzalcoatl" by his Nahua followers.

In the Maya area he was known as Kukulcan or Ququmatz, names that also translate as "feathered serpent" in different Mayan languages. In the era following the 16th-century Spanish Conquest a number of sources were written that describe the god "Quetzalcoatl" and relates him to a ruler of the mythico-historic city of Tollan called by the names "Ce Acatl", "Topiltzin", "Nacxitl" or "Quetzalcoatl".

source
The stories of such creatures date back to the earliest human writings, those of Sumer (meaning "land of the guardians"), Babylon (meaning "gate of the gods"), and other civilizations of ancient Mesopotamia. One of these, the Sumerian King List, tells the story of the god, Anu, chief god of an extraterrestrial race called the Anunnaki, and his sons, Enki and Enlil. It is clear from the texts and the illustrations left by the Sumerians that at least some of these "gods", including Enki (also known as Ea), were Reptilian in appearance.

The funny thing here is the Creation Story told by the Nag Hammadi Texts.

They tell the story of human creation this way:

The bodies of Adam and Eve were overlaid with a horny skin that was as bright as daylight, like a luminescent garment.

Thus, it seems, they didn’t need clothing.

Further, these texts tell a far different story about the tree of knowledge than that told in Genesis:

"She took some of its fruit and ate, and she gave to her husband also. ... Then their minds opened. For when they ate, the light of knowledge shone for them. When they saw their makers, they loathed them since they were beastly forms. They understood very much."

In another ancient Jewish document, known as The Haggadah, it is made clear that the serpent was not merely a snake:

"Among the animals, the serpent was notable. Of all of them, he had the most excellent qualities, in some of which he resembled man. Like man, he stood upright on two feet, and in height, he was equal to the camel. ...

His superior mental gifts caused him to become an infidel. It likewise explains his envy of man, especially his conjugal visits. ... In punishment for tempting Eve, God said, ’I created you to be king over the animals ... but you were not satisfied. ... I created you of upright posture ... therefore, you shall go upon your belly.’"

source
"When they saw their makers, they loathed them since they were beastly forms. They understood very much."
I would have to say the "Makers of Humankind" were no doubt Reptilians.
Were Humans Created by Reptilians?

Dragon Gods

Draconians, known as the Serpent Race

Serpent (symbolism)

"The Reptilians: Humanity's Historical Link to the Serpent Race"

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

It doesn't say that. It says he who blasphemes the Holy Spirit. Rejecting His call to Christ throughout one's entire life is the ultimate blasphemy of Him. Christ already paid for your sins, all you need to do is repent and trust Him and the revelation the Holy Spirit gives to all men about Him.

No it doesn't say that. You're reading into it your own thoughts on the Holy Spirit. The scripture doesn't say anything about what the Holy Spirit is saying or calling or doing or even is, at all!

And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come,"

Could it be that assigning words and deeds to the Holy Spirit that are untrue is an unforgivable sin on your part? I dare not speak to you of my relationship with the Holy Spirit, lest you criticize it and be condemned to Hell.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Ignorance about a subject doesn't mean you're stupid, just not well studied up on the subject. I'm ignorant to Molecular Biology, it's because I've never taken a course on it, not because I failed a course in it.

I agree, I wish everyone would stop throwing around the word "ignorance" as an insult. To some degree it makes you look less intelligent by doing so.

Ignorance just means lack of knowledge. E.g. NuT is ignorant on Molecular Biology, as I'm ignorant on String Theory. Being willfully ignornat is a different story and I don't think many people are "dumb on purpose".

Sorry for the OT post, it's just comments like what NuT quoted really grinds my gears.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

Nope.

And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come,"

The text clearly states that speaking against Jesus is forgivable. In otherwords, not believing in Jesus is a forgivable sin.

I can shout from the rooftops that Jesus didn't die on the cross for our sins, and really, really mean it. If i'm wrong, I'll still be forgiven.

What is the Holy Spirit? I have my own definition. If I tell you what I believe the HS to be, and tell you that I live by that belief and hold it dear to my heart, and you speak against my HS, does that mean you will not be forgiven by god, because you don't agree with me as who or what the Holy Spirit actually is?

edit on 5-4-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)

The Holy Spirit is the Helper. Jesus said multiple times before his Crucifixion that he will send a helper - John 14:26 - But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

You may be more right than you think. However, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one - so to deny Christ IS to deny the Holy Spirit, because the only way to get the Holy Spirit is by believing in Christ.

Originally posted by Lionhearte

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Lionhearte

 

Nope.

And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come,"

The text clearly states that speaking against Jesus is forgivable. In otherwords, not believing in Jesus is a forgivable sin.

I can shout from the rooftops that Jesus didn't die on the cross for our sins, and really, really mean it. If i'm wrong, I'll still be forgiven.

What is the Holy Spirit? I have my own definition. If I tell you what I believe the HS to be, and tell you that I live by that belief and hold it dear to my heart, and you speak against my HS, does that mean you will not be forgiven by god, because you don't agree with me as who or what the Holy Spirit actually is?

edit on 5-4-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)

The Holy Spirit is the Helper. Jesus said multiple times before his Crucifixion that he will send a helper - John 14:26 - But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

You may be more right than you think. However, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are one - so to deny Christ IS to deny the Holy Spirit, because the only way to get the Holy Spirit is by believing in Christ.

The Holy Spirit, in my opinion, has always abided with mankind. Wasn't the dove that appeared over Jesus' head, during his baptism, supposedly the Holy Spirit?

Is the Holy Spirit the same and the "helper?" I don't think so. The idea of the trinity is not embedded in scripture, it's made up for convenience sake. You making links that are not within the scripture that damn those whose curse the Holy Spirit.

Nowhere in the scripture, that is quoted above, does Jesus say that he, the son of man, is one in the same as the Holy Spirit. You should be very careful when arguing about the Holy Spirit that you don't offend, and be damned forever!

reply to post by novastrike81


Yes but this websites motto is to deny ignorance.

We are supposed to dig deep into things, and find out the truths of our reality.

Somebody who reads through the Holy Bible in 3 minutes and then decides its a load of BS and comes on here deciding to bash the most important text ever written in history - to me, that is the epitome of ignorance, and we must try and stomp it out, with knowledge, wisdom and Love.

reply to post by windword

No it doesn't say that. You're reading into it your own thoughts on the Holy Spirit.

No I'm not, the Holy Spirit IS His Spirit. So it means something deeper. And what I said was true, the verse says "blasphemy" (mark 3:29):

"But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:"

"Against" is in the present imperative sense in the Greek, meaning not an action that was done, but a present action that continues throughout the future and doesn't stop. English is one of the laziest, fuzziest languages known to mankind. Greek, on the other hand, is one of the most strict and descriptive languages known to mankind. Verbs must meet 5 different conditions alone to even be used in any given sentence.

reply to post by windword


You know not what you speak of.

John 10:28-32 "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

I and my Father are one. "

Matthew 28:18-20 "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

You do understand the Trinity is a Biblically supported doctrine, correct?

reply to post by Iason321


I'm really not sure that one really needs to read the entire bible to make a judgement. It's mythology is rich within our culture already. Your assertion is like telling people that they need to know everything that went into the development of Coca Cola in order to decide if they like it or not.

Every American knows the myth. Jesus was born of a virgin, died on a cross for our sins and then rose from the dead. Why does one to need read more of the bible to reject these tenets?

reply to post by windword


Dude, Carlton is a heretic. His Christology, Theology, and Soeteriology is not consistent with Biblical Christianity. Those are the principles of the Christian faith that are non-negotiable. The methods can and should vary to be cutting edge and applicable to the culture and time, but the fundamental principles should never change whatsoever.

He's not a Christian, he rejected the faith. He's just a blind guide leading the blind.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

No I'm not, the Holy Spirit IS His Spirit. So it means something deeper. And what I said was true, the verse says "blasphemy" (mark 3:29):

Says you!
2nd obligatory

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by windword

 

Dude, Carlton is a heretic. His Christology, Theology, and Soeteriology is not consistent with Biblical Christianity. Those are the principles of the Christian faith that are non-negotiable. The methods can and should vary to be cutting edge and applicable to the culture and time, but the fundamental principles should never change whatsoever.

He's not a Christian, he rejected the faith. He's just a blind guide leading the blind.

I'm not a Christian. I will proudly tout that fact. But Carlton Pearson IS a Christian and relies on the death and resurrection of Jesus for his faith. You are not in a position to judge his relationship with god, but only his method of dissemination.

reply to post by Iason321


Nothing that you have posted proves or convinces me that Jesus is the Holy Spirit. IMHO, the Holy Spirit has always abided with mankind.

EDIT: Further, to be one with the father only implies a family relation. I and my family are one family.

reply to post by windword

Nowhere in the scripture, that is quoted above, does Jesus say that he, the son of man, is one in the same as the Holy Spirit. You should be very careful when arguing about the Holy Spirit that you don't offend, and be damned forever!

"But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God." 1 Cor. 2:10

"You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you"

Romans 8:9-11

reply to post by NOTurTypical


I disregard anything Pauline as a forgery of the Catholic Church. Please don't quote Paul to me again, as it is not gospel.