reply to post by HolgerTheDane2
That would imply choice by design.
The Creator created satan, a spiritual entity whom most claim to understand.
The cosmos is quite large.
Satan is Not God and never was regardless of the effort.
Why would one follow an entity that wished to destroy them?
Seems so foolish.
I can't speak for 'satan' (lower case) though I'm sure the Creator is quite understanding in his creations 'development'.
Folks should be careful about what they assume to know.
Who knows U?
*U*
The Biblical God - Why isn't credit being given where credit is due?, page 6
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 08:28 AM by MamaJ
reply to post by Wandering Scribe
You sought Christ because you were in pain, because you suffered, and were upset that a Creator could have robbed you of something so important. I left God long before I lost my wife and child. I left God and Christ because they do not make sense; they are illogical and incomplete. Where you use them as a crutch, I discarded them for the same reasons: people turn to Christianity when they just do not understand. Rather than do the work to learn the "why" and "how come" of things, they choose instead to believe in a "God of the gaps." We don't know why thing A happens... God did it. We don't know how process C occurs... God does it. This line of reasoning is irrational. Rather than admitting we don't know, which is the honest route, we choose to fill it with pipe dreams and candy-coated things because it makes us more comfortable. I think that is where we differ, MamaJ. I was never comfortable with trading understanding for peace of mind. I would rather say "I don't know" then pretend to know. I cannot knowingly be intellectually dishonest. I am open to our lessons and knowledge, though. That was why I replied to you. I am not open to your pity and woe-is-me story though. When your material is faulty, I will call you on it. You say "mythology is around for a reason," and this has caught my interest. I am a mythographer. I study the evolution of West Asian mythology. Sumerian, Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Levantine, Hebraic, Hattian, Anatolian, Indo-European, Roman and Christian to be precise. I would love to talk about the importance of mythology, the history of mythology, and from where Christian mythology arises. That is my regular course of study actually.
Hahaha... I sought out our maker when I was a little girl. Always been a deep thinker.
I told the story of Joshua, which shows how compassionate you are in your reply. That's sad. It was horrific and I indeed have pain but the pain subsided when I left God of the Bible for better understanding.
Mythologies are around for a reason and I have studied it at length. When combined with religions and what we know about the body and the universe a complete picture emerges.
I posted this on another thread buts it's relevant here as well to get us started. I should just make a thread because the jumping around has me confused! Lol
I will post it below.
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 09:02 AM by autowrench
reply to post by Miri08
Yes, a completely honest question that bears an answer, and I hear you. But haven't you noticed that one cannot question the Christians on their book, faith, or religion, or they call it an attack on them, personally?
I have nothing against Christians, Jews, or Muslims, just have a lot of questions. I too would like to know how a Bible believer can just reconcile all these killings like they do? And, people are still today being killed in the name of God/Jesus. My question is, where, and when does the killing end?
I have nothing against Christians or against Judaism in general. I'm asking how people reconcile a literal reading of the bible when it comes to the point of gods direct killings because I genuinely want to know.
Yes, a completely honest question that bears an answer, and I hear you. But haven't you noticed that one cannot question the Christians on their book, faith, or religion, or they call it an attack on them, personally?
I have nothing against Christians, Jews, or Muslims, just have a lot of questions. I too would like to know how a Bible believer can just reconcile all these killings like they do? And, people are still today being killed in the name of God/Jesus. My question is, where, and when does the killing end?
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 09:08 AM by adjensen
reply to post by Miri08
Well, I'm very happy to have helped you out, glad that you stuck with me
By the way, the failing of people who use instances such as you cite in the original post is that they take a literal view of the Bible, but only the parts that they agree with. So they lay claim that "God is evil" by saying "look at all these people he killed" (a literal reading of the text) and denounce it as an evil deed by dismissing the parts of the Hebrew Bible that demonstrate that God cannot be immoral (a non-literal reading of the text.) This is colloquially referred to as "cherry picking".
Of course, with that in mind, the other position I gave you, the non-literal reading, would seem to suffer from the same shortcoming, and my literal reading friends do occasionally give me a little poke in the ribs for it, but here's why it isn't the same thing. I believe that points of theological reference should be taken literally, because when they are, they remain remarkably consistent, are still demonstrable today (for those who see God at work in the world) and represent what we can know about God. As with the literalists, I believe that there are things that we cannot know or understand about God (the whole "My ways are not your ways" thing,) but there are definitely things that we can know.
However, on matters which do not represent points of theology, we tend to take a more flexible view that there are matters of culture and history in the Bible, which may or may not be accurate, and may or may not reflect what God thinks (rather than what the author thought.) It's not that we say that something didn't happen, just that we allow for the fact that it might not have. So, unlike the "God is evil" irrationalist, we're not cherry picking, because we don't dismiss things we don't like, we just don't factor them in, and if you were to demand that we defend something we're not sure about, we always can take the same position of the literalist, that it must be moral, whether we understand why or not, because we have a literal interpretation of the attributes of God.
An example would the dietary laws in Leviticus, which were steadfastly held to by the Jews, and still are today. However, Jesus makes the point that it's not what goes into you that makes you unclean, but rather what comes out -- food doesn't drive a wedge between you and God, but the words you speak can. And thus, Christians eat whatever they want, while Jews avoid pork and shellfish and stuff. A literal reader will have a perfectly valid explanation for that, while a non-literal reader just says "that was a cultural thing, not a theological thing, so it isn't important that it be taken literally."
The weakness of the non-literal position is that it is a rather dangerous path to follow for the theologically challenged (which represents probably 99% of Christians,) because it can allow one to justify pretty much any act as being moral, even ones that are obviously wrong. Because, in the end, it doesn't matter what we think are moral acts, but what God thinks.
Best of luck on your continued journey.
Well, I'm very happy to have helped you out, glad that you stuck with me
By the way, the failing of people who use instances such as you cite in the original post is that they take a literal view of the Bible, but only the parts that they agree with. So they lay claim that "God is evil" by saying "look at all these people he killed" (a literal reading of the text) and denounce it as an evil deed by dismissing the parts of the Hebrew Bible that demonstrate that God cannot be immoral (a non-literal reading of the text.) This is colloquially referred to as "cherry picking".
Of course, with that in mind, the other position I gave you, the non-literal reading, would seem to suffer from the same shortcoming, and my literal reading friends do occasionally give me a little poke in the ribs for it, but here's why it isn't the same thing. I believe that points of theological reference should be taken literally, because when they are, they remain remarkably consistent, are still demonstrable today (for those who see God at work in the world) and represent what we can know about God. As with the literalists, I believe that there are things that we cannot know or understand about God (the whole "My ways are not your ways" thing,) but there are definitely things that we can know.
However, on matters which do not represent points of theology, we tend to take a more flexible view that there are matters of culture and history in the Bible, which may or may not be accurate, and may or may not reflect what God thinks (rather than what the author thought.) It's not that we say that something didn't happen, just that we allow for the fact that it might not have. So, unlike the "God is evil" irrationalist, we're not cherry picking, because we don't dismiss things we don't like, we just don't factor them in, and if you were to demand that we defend something we're not sure about, we always can take the same position of the literalist, that it must be moral, whether we understand why or not, because we have a literal interpretation of the attributes of God.
An example would the dietary laws in Leviticus, which were steadfastly held to by the Jews, and still are today. However, Jesus makes the point that it's not what goes into you that makes you unclean, but rather what comes out -- food doesn't drive a wedge between you and God, but the words you speak can. And thus, Christians eat whatever they want, while Jews avoid pork and shellfish and stuff. A literal reader will have a perfectly valid explanation for that, while a non-literal reader just says "that was a cultural thing, not a theological thing, so it isn't important that it be taken literally."
The weakness of the non-literal position is that it is a rather dangerous path to follow for the theologically challenged (which represents probably 99% of Christians,) because it can allow one to justify pretty much any act as being moral, even ones that are obviously wrong. Because, in the end, it doesn't matter what we think are moral acts, but what God thinks.
Best of luck on your continued journey.
edit on 13-9-2012 by adjensen because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 09:18 AM by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ
I vaguely remember the explanations you've offered to me on those subjects, but they didn't convince me because while it's possible that you're correct, there's no way to say that your view is the only possible interpretation.
And that's where I'm hung in our discussion. You haven't proven to me, beyond a doubt, that your answers are the ONLY answers that are plausible. Someone will come along and say, "That's not right. I believe this and this," and they'll be right too because the same evidence you've presented to me also works in their favor. One of the underlying causes of my distaste for the Bible is that all of the important parts, or the parts that are most emphasized or most examined, are so deliberately vague that you could throw a dozen answers in a hat and no matter which one you draw out, it would look right...largely depending on how you look at it, of course. That's the problem with metaphors: without a clear context (again, the obscurity of the scriptures poses a great difficulty here) you have no real way of knowing what the author truly meant.
In matters of prose and poetry, that's a beautiful quality. But when you base your life and how you treat other people on that "poetry", the importance of KNOWING the true intent comes to the fore. You'll say that the previous teachings should clear that up, but the exact same issue applies to those teachings as well. Imagine reading a poem from another country, and not knowing that country's cultures and traditions and beliefs and values...it doesn't have the same understanding to it. You miss the subtleties, and those subtleties often make all the difference. That's the beauty of metaphor and allegory. And then, because of the REASON these people are reading the Bible, the difficulties and quarrels and qualms and struggles that have lead them to look for an answer, that's when you have a number of different people looking at it different ways for different reasons that they are unwilling to admit even to themselves, and you have a broad range of answers that contradict each other, but when examined one by one, they all ring as possibly true. And everyone takes that as confirmation of validity.
Do you see what I'm saying?
I vaguely remember the explanations you've offered to me on those subjects, but they didn't convince me because while it's possible that you're correct, there's no way to say that your view is the only possible interpretation.
And that's where I'm hung in our discussion. You haven't proven to me, beyond a doubt, that your answers are the ONLY answers that are plausible. Someone will come along and say, "That's not right. I believe this and this," and they'll be right too because the same evidence you've presented to me also works in their favor. One of the underlying causes of my distaste for the Bible is that all of the important parts, or the parts that are most emphasized or most examined, are so deliberately vague that you could throw a dozen answers in a hat and no matter which one you draw out, it would look right...largely depending on how you look at it, of course. That's the problem with metaphors: without a clear context (again, the obscurity of the scriptures poses a great difficulty here) you have no real way of knowing what the author truly meant.
In matters of prose and poetry, that's a beautiful quality. But when you base your life and how you treat other people on that "poetry", the importance of KNOWING the true intent comes to the fore. You'll say that the previous teachings should clear that up, but the exact same issue applies to those teachings as well. Imagine reading a poem from another country, and not knowing that country's cultures and traditions and beliefs and values...it doesn't have the same understanding to it. You miss the subtleties, and those subtleties often make all the difference. That's the beauty of metaphor and allegory. And then, because of the REASON these people are reading the Bible, the difficulties and quarrels and qualms and struggles that have lead them to look for an answer, that's when you have a number of different people looking at it different ways for different reasons that they are unwilling to admit even to themselves, and you have a broad range of answers that contradict each other, but when examined one by one, they all ring as possibly true. And everyone takes that as confirmation of validity.
Do you see what I'm saying?
edit on 13-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 09:25 AM by MamaJ
reply to post by AfterInfinity
I do understand what you are saying... I do and have understood your position from the beginning.
Forget about who is right and who is wrong as its holding you back from seeing " it" for what it is.
My words are wasted and not understood when you are on the defense about right or wrong.
Take it ALL IN and then see for yourself if I'm right.
For example, all that I have offered thus far can be researched and pondered upon. That comes first before a rebuttal can be had.
I do understand what you are saying... I do and have understood your position from the beginning.
Forget about who is right and who is wrong as its holding you back from seeing " it" for what it is.
My words are wasted and not understood when you are on the defense about right or wrong.
Take it ALL IN and then see for yourself if I'm right.
For example, all that I have offered thus far can be researched and pondered upon. That comes first before a rebuttal can be had.
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 09:31 AM by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ
I understand that. You choose to view it a certain way, but the Bible tends to leave open a back door that allows erroneous behavior to become justified in a warped kind of way.
With all due respect, the philosophy I follow kind of "herds" all students to chase their answers toward a more positive outlet; instead of believing that everyone is wrong, everyone is instead learning and there ARE no absolutes, there ARE no right ways, there are only opportunities to learn. And as long as you learn, you will always come out on top.
Instead of the whole "you must do this or you will be punished, and if you DO do this, you will be rewarded" primitive mindset the Bible offers. As I said before, that may not be your game in that faith, but that's the reason others play it. They do it so they can feel special, feel loved, and believe that they will be okay no matter what.
Two different approaches to the same outcome, but the approaches are not identical in their paths and philosophies. One numbs the pain of living, the other helps you understand it. It's very difficult to explain, but I hope you understand what I'm trying ti impart to you.
In short, we will never agree, but I want you to see that my way is just as valid as yours. That's the point I've been arguing all along.
I understand that. You choose to view it a certain way, but the Bible tends to leave open a back door that allows erroneous behavior to become justified in a warped kind of way.
With all due respect, the philosophy I follow kind of "herds" all students to chase their answers toward a more positive outlet; instead of believing that everyone is wrong, everyone is instead learning and there ARE no absolutes, there ARE no right ways, there are only opportunities to learn. And as long as you learn, you will always come out on top.
Instead of the whole "you must do this or you will be punished, and if you DO do this, you will be rewarded" primitive mindset the Bible offers. As I said before, that may not be your game in that faith, but that's the reason others play it. They do it so they can feel special, feel loved, and believe that they will be okay no matter what.
Two different approaches to the same outcome, but the approaches are not identical in their paths and philosophies. One numbs the pain of living, the other helps you understand it. It's very difficult to explain, but I hope you understand what I'm trying ti impart to you.
In short, we will never agree, but I want you to see that my way is just as valid as yours. That's the point I've been arguing all along.
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 09:43 AM by MamaJ
Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ
I understand that. You choose to view it a certain way, but the Bible tends to leave open a back door that allows erroneous behavior to become justified in a warped kind of way.
With all due respect, the philosophy I follow kind of "herds" all students to chase their answers toward a more positive outlet; instead of believing that everyone is wrong, everyone is instead learning and there ARE no absolutes, there ARE no right ways, there are only opportunities to learn. And as long as you learn, you will always come out on top.
Instead of the whole "you must do this or you will be punished, and if you DO do this, you will be rewarded" primitive mindset the Bible offers. As I said before, that may not be your game in that faith, but that's the reason others play it. They do it so they can feel special, feel loved, and believe that they will be okay no matter what.
Two different approaches to the same outcome, but the approaches are not identical in their paths and philosophies. One numbs the pain of living, the other helps you understand it. It's very difficult to explain, but I hope you understand what I'm trying ti impart to you.
In short, we will never agree, but I want you to see that my way is just as valid as yours. That's the point I've been arguing all along.
" they do it so they will feel special, and believe they will be ok no matter what".
We are special!
We must believe we will be ok. Mind is the builder!
We are not " ok " in matter. We struggle.
You have been very argumentative from the beginning. I understand why. This is the reason why I like talking with people who want to learn something refreshing instead of the same old doctrine that's gazed upon with half truth and not the entire truth.
The thing is, my words have yet to even be considered by you as you feel you are " right" and I am " wrong". It's a mentality that leaves one stuck.
I'm glad and happy for you as you have your truth and are satisfied.
I wanted the Master Key of Wisdom and have it. If there is a door you need to unlock just find me on here and I will unlock it for you. Meaning, I'm available when you become more open to hearing another idea/ ideas other than your own.
edit on 13-9-2012 by MamaJ because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 10:26 AM by brackforce
Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by Miri08
that God is ultimately righteous and just, so when we come upon an issue such as this, which we perceive to be an immoral act, such as the "Midianite massacre", the conflict must be resolved by stating that it was a moral act on the part of God, and we just don't understand it.
My ATS signature reflects this -- "In the end faith isn't about God meeting your expectations but you meeting his.", which means that God judges us, we don't judge him, because he understands us, we don't (necessarily) understand him.
In other words, it doesn't matter if you personally think that to be an immoral act, God cannot be immoral, so if that's what he did, it was moral, and the deficiency is your understanding, not anything God did.
This part is what really did it for me. It seems simple like "why didn't I think of this" but this is the part that I could not get at all. And it makes perfect sense. I'm thinking this is how the people that raised me probably thought and that makes me feel better about so many things. Like when I'm looking back remembering certain things they said and did , those things make more sense now in light of this right here. I seriously think you just did for me in one post what therapy hasn't been able to do for me in 18 years. From when I lost them at 9 years old certain things I could not understand. I'm not kidding, I feel like for the first time I understand them.
edit on 13-9-2012 by Miri08 because: (no reason given)
I don't understand this at all. You have just proven that you will go to any lengths to believe that the Bible is true by distorting your view of what is clearly written there to make it fit what you want to believe. When god does something you don't understand then you forfeit to the text and determine that god is the greater being so you just have to trust that he knows what he's doing...or, as said in some other posts, determine that you're reading a particular passage that was written by man who got it wrong.
Now, if the bible is 100% true and accurate then I completely understand doing whatever it takes to twist, contort, and pick apart whatever you can to understand what it says or is trying to say (obviously then, being a religious text, it has to be all mysterious so that only those with true devotion can understand the underlying meaning).
BUT, what is the reason for believing that it's true in the first place? Why do people take this text written by uneducated warmongers as absolute truth and do everything they can to figure out the best way to believe it instead of actually reading it as it is written and saying "yea, right." Why don't you do the same for the Quran, the Vedas, Tao Te Ching, or the Book of the Dead? The only possible answer I can come up with is tradition. That's what you were told growing up so that's what you revert to when looking for "truth." If you had been raised in Afghanistan you would be doing exactly the same thing with the Quran. If you had been raised in India you would be trying to understand something out of Rigveda, but instead you happened to grow up with Christians so the Bible is the place to go. I suggest reading it as it is written front to back without any apologetic desire to make it true and form an opinion based on what it actually says. Then, if you still want more understanding, start using a lexicon and biblical encyclopedia to figure out that the original religion is nothing like what people think it is today and decide for yourself if it really is believable or not. You've decided in your head that you have to believe it and are coming up with excuses why. I did the same thing. Then at one point I finally gave in and realized, like Santa Claus, that it's a bunch of made up stories and guess what....I'm still here. You will finally be free and the world isn't going to end because you broke free of oppressive tradition.
If you haven't ever watched any videos of Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens debate religious clergy members I suggest you do. They are a lot more eloquent that I and will throw common sense arguments against religion out there that might very well completely change the way you see things. I had already figured out for myself that I didn't believe it after taking a year of Hebrew, 5 or 6 college courses on Christianity, other philosophy and religion classes, and extreme hardcore study on my own spanning over a year or so. I wish I had known about these guys back then. It would have made my transition to freedom much easier.
I'll leave you with this little gem from Exodus 21:32:
"If the ox shall gore a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned."
Really? So God condones slavery AND believes in stoning an animal to death.
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 10:33 AM by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ
Alright...I wish to ask you something. "God" teaches us to love each other, right? And he is love, supposedly. So why does his holy scripture condemn us for doing innocent things like loving the same gender, or eating pork, or wearing mixed cloths, or having intercourse during the moon cycle?
Alright...I wish to ask you something. "God" teaches us to love each other, right? And he is love, supposedly. So why does his holy scripture condemn us for doing innocent things like loving the same gender, or eating pork, or wearing mixed cloths, or having intercourse during the moon cycle?
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 10:59 AM by MamaJ
Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ
Alright...I wish to ask you something. "God" teaches us to love each other, right? And he is love, supposedly. So why does his holy scripture condemn us for doing innocent things like loving the same gender, or eating pork, or wearing mixed cloths, or having intercourse during the moon cycle?
His scripture shows us man and his evolving into Christ. The end is revelations for a reason.
Jesus/ Hermes is showing us through the writings/ Word how people THOUGHT back then and how it's relative to this day.
Before we were closely knitted to matter our form did not allow us to eat the meat. We actually mated with animals and became" unlcean" before Man/ Adam, hence all the stories of forms who were monstrosities.
This is why the soul Adam( mankind) split into two to create a projection of male and female.
The stories then take on different forms. Man and woman were seen as family and a union was had.
Perversion of desires ( apple of my eye) are sexual indeed along with other perversions we see today.
Loving the same sex in my view is a story that's transcending in to today's " mental time" to learn patience, judging not, and loving thy neighbor as yourself but is also viewed mentally as a perversion.
Mind is the builder and the creator.
Mind over matter has got to be implemented and Jesus shows us this as well as the Biblical stories.
The way WE evolve is not just individually but collective as well.
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 11:04 AM by adjensen
reply to post by brackforce
Actually, I believe that the OP was looking to understand why some people that he had known in the past believed what they did, not that he was looking to adopt such beliefs.
I would suggest that you have a look at the Hitchens and Dawkins debates against William Lane Craig.
Here's how an atheist described a Hitchens / Craig debate:
As for the Dawkins / Craig debate, well, you won't find any reviews of it, because Dawkins has refused to debate Craig, despite his claim that he will debate anyone, at any time, on the subject of atheism. For this, he's been called a coward by fellow atheists (Source) .
No, atheists tend to be pretty poor performers in debates against philosophers, even "superstars" like Hitchens, Dawkins and Sam Harris (who also face planted on a debate with Craig, because he spent most of the time debating "Why Sam Harris isn't a Christian", which wasn't the subject of the debate.)
Why do they fail? Because they aren't philosophers, so all they really have are simple minded arguments that wither in the light of philosophical refutation.
Actually, I believe that the OP was looking to understand why some people that he had known in the past believed what they did, not that he was looking to adopt such beliefs.
If you haven't ever watched any videos of Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens debate religious clergy members I suggest you do. They are a lot more eloquent that I and will throw common sense arguments against religion out there that might very well completely change the way you see things.
I would suggest that you have a look at the Hitchens and Dawkins debates against William Lane Craig.
Here's how an atheist described a Hitchens / Craig debate:
Craig was flawless and unstoppable. Hitchens was rambling and incoherent, with the occasional rhetorical jab. Frankly, Craig spanked Hitchens like a foolish child. (Source)
As for the Dawkins / Craig debate, well, you won't find any reviews of it, because Dawkins has refused to debate Craig, despite his claim that he will debate anyone, at any time, on the subject of atheism. For this, he's been called a coward by fellow atheists (Source) .
No, atheists tend to be pretty poor performers in debates against philosophers, even "superstars" like Hitchens, Dawkins and Sam Harris (who also face planted on a debate with Craig, because he spent most of the time debating "Why Sam Harris isn't a Christian", which wasn't the subject of the debate.)
Why do they fail? Because they aren't philosophers, so all they really have are simple minded arguments that wither in the light of philosophical refutation.
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 11:08 AM by AfterInfinity
reply to post by adjensen
Atheists aren't philosophers? You can have a philosophy without believing in a god...and you can discuss ideas you don't believe in. The term used would be 'hypothetically'.
"If we take this to be true, then theoretically, this would be such and such..." Closed-minded atheists, on the other hand, are another matter entirely.
No, atheists tend to be pretty poor performers in debates against philosophers,
Atheists aren't philosophers? You can have a philosophy without believing in a god...and you can discuss ideas you don't believe in. The term used would be 'hypothetically'.
"If we take this to be true, then theoretically, this would be such and such..." Closed-minded atheists, on the other hand, are another matter entirely.
edit on 13-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 11:10 AM by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ
So those portions of the Bible aren't actually instructions on how to live today, but rather a comparison to learn by? How does that reflect upon "God"s behavior in those times?
Jesus/ Hermes is showing us through the writings/ Word how people THOUGHT back then and how it's relative to this day.
So those portions of the Bible aren't actually instructions on how to live today, but rather a comparison to learn by? How does that reflect upon "God"s behavior in those times?
edit on 13-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 11:18 AM by brackforce
reply to post by adjensen
Interesting. I hadn't heard of this and look forward to checking it out. Thanks for the info!
Interesting. I hadn't heard of this and look forward to checking it out. Thanks for the info!
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 11:20 AM by Miri08
reply to post by brackforce
What adjensen said here is correct (except I'm female, not important to the discussion but still lol) I do believe in god but not necessarily in a traditional sense but I am trying to understand some things about my early family and adjensen really helped me to see how they may have been looking at things.
Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by brackforce
Actually, I believe that the OP was looking to understand why some people that he had known in the past believed what they did, not that he was looking to adopt such beliefs.
What adjensen said here is correct (except I'm female, not important to the discussion but still lol) I do believe in god but not necessarily in a traditional sense but I am trying to understand some things about my early family and adjensen really helped me to see how they may have been looking at things.
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 11:28 AM by MamaJ
Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ
Jesus/ Hermes is showing us through the writings/ Word how people THOUGHT back then and how it's relative to this day.
So those portions of the Bible aren't actually instructions on how to live today, but rather a comparison to learn by? How does that reflect upon "God"s behavior in those times?edit on 13-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)
YES!!!
That's a really good question as God is outside of the laws of physics and time/ matter. He is on the outside looking IN. He is the same today as he was yesterday and will be. He IS as jesus said he is. He IS " I am that ... I AM".
I am is what?
An expression of experience. We are the ALL AND THE ONE. He has given is tools ( five sense) in which to express his good order in nature but what we do sometimes does not reflect the good order in which it was created to be. We distort and pervert it as some children do. This is also why Jesus called us children because we are but we are growing/ evolving.
edit on 13-9-2012 by MamaJ because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 13-9-2012 @ 11:35 AM by brackforce
reply to post by Miri08
Understood, but I thought my post might help you see where they were coming from, too...tradition without questioning. Most people are raised to believe something and never truly question it. Or, before the information age we are living in now, they had no way of verifying whether any of it was true and/or didn't have access to other perspectives. All they had to go on was what they were told and were forced to come up with ways to make the crazy parts make sense to them in the framework of their belief system. Today, however we have access to a wealth of information including other religions, science, and a way better understanding of reality than people did just a couple of hundred years ago which, I would think, should result in more common sense when it comes to unbelievable stories like those found in the Bible.
Understood, but I thought my post might help you see where they were coming from, too...tradition without questioning. Most people are raised to believe something and never truly question it. Or, before the information age we are living in now, they had no way of verifying whether any of it was true and/or didn't have access to other perspectives. All they had to go on was what they were told and were forced to come up with ways to make the crazy parts make sense to them in the framework of their belief system. Today, however we have access to a wealth of information including other religions, science, and a way better understanding of reality than people did just a couple of hundred years ago which, I would think, should result in more common sense when it comes to unbelievable stories like those found in the Bible.
Muslim group, Ansar al-Sunna, demand breakaway Islamic nation in Norway or another 9/11 threatened
Posted 4 days ago with 41 member flags
Posted 4 days ago with 41 member flags
Who Are The "Synagogue of Satan", The "Jews" Who Are Not Jews", Mentioned In Revelation?
Posted 7 days ago with 24 member flags
Posted 7 days ago with 24 member flags
The Star of David is not a Jewish symbol. The seal of Solomon is a tool of Jinn control.
Posted 7 days ago with 23 member flags
Posted 7 days ago with 23 member flags
Pastor who "kicked" Holy Spirit into woman banned from UK! Religious discrimination?
Posted 18 days ago with 8 member flags
Posted 18 days ago with 8 member flags
Catholic TV Star, the Rev. Benedict Groeschel, Defends Child Sex Abusers
Posted 12 days ago with 8 member flags
Posted 12 days ago with 8 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
A.C.R.T.C. soon to be unmanned drone facility, U.F.O. seen in the skies
Area 51 and other Facilities: 36 minutes ago
Area 51 and other Facilities: 36 minutes ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
Military Says No Presidential Authorization Needed To Quell “Civil Disturbances”
New World Order: 17 hours ago, 64 flags
New World Order: 17 hours ago, 64 flags
ATS Live:161:Trees,Ghosts,Phantom 'Copters,Pshop,Teaching,Jail,Violence,MajorTom,Animals,
ATS Live: 8 hours ago, 19 flags
ATS Live: 8 hours ago, 19 flags
Diaper change in Starbucks seating area ends with store calling Denver police
Other Current Events: 17 hours ago, 16 flags
Other Current Events: 17 hours ago, 16 flags
Student Rejected for Diversity Post Because He is "White"
Breaking Alternative News: 6 hours ago, 15 flags
Breaking Alternative News: 6 hours ago, 15 flags
World Health Organization (WHO); voices concern about SARS-like Coronavirus.
Diseases and Pandemics: 16 hours ago, 10 flags
Diseases and Pandemics: 16 hours ago, 10 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
Diaper change in Starbucks seating area ends with store calling Denver police
Other Current Events: 17 hours ago, 99 replies
Other Current Events: 17 hours ago, 99 replies
Military Says No Presidential Authorization Needed To Quell “Civil Disturbances”
New World Order: 17 hours ago, 74 replies
New World Order: 17 hours ago, 74 replies
Student Rejected for Diversity Post Because He is "White"
Breaking Alternative News: 6 hours ago, 64 replies
Breaking Alternative News: 6 hours ago, 64 replies
The Answer to ALL of your questions, Enlightenment, Oneness...
Philosophy and Metaphysics: 12 hours ago, 51 replies
Philosophy and Metaphysics: 12 hours ago, 51 replies
The Abundance of NASA's STS Mission Footage is the Most Compelling Evidence UFOs Exist
Aliens and UFOs: 6 hours ago, 39 replies
Aliens and UFOs: 6 hours ago, 39 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.460 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.460 seconds
