Are there bigger HYPOCRITES on this planet then atheists???

page: 18
17
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

You don't even have the most rudimentary understanding of the judeo-christian tradition...do you?


I know the trinity doctrine very well and have discussed it with many trinitarians over the past 16 years. I know that some trinitarians say the trinity is three gods in unity and some avoid calling them three gods. Those who avoid it are in denial. The trinity is three gods.




posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by truejew
 


Jesus didn't give a specific day to do communion man, all he said was when we do it, to do it in remembrance of him.


What other day did Jesus have communion on?



posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Explain this, even the real Jews scratch their heads and then ignore what their own scripture teaches.

Genesis 1.

Then God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth" (Genesis 1:26).

If you can then you can go out and teach all the Rabbis and Jewish Scholars, cos they dont have an answer



posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch
Explain this, even the real Jews scratch their heads and then ignore what their own scripture teaches.

Genesis 1.

Then God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth" (Genesis 1:26).

If you can then you can go out and teach all the Rabbis and Jewish Scholars, cos they dont have an answer


God was speaking to the Angels.



posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by borntowatch
Explain this, even the real Jews scratch their heads and then ignore what their own scripture teaches.

Genesis 1.

Then God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth" (Genesis 1:26).

If you can then you can go out and teach all the Rabbis and Jewish Scholars, cos they dont have an answer


God was speaking to the Angels.


Angels helped God create the earth? Actual conversations in the Talmud between God and angels never use we/us pronouns. The Talmud is full of plural verbs, nouns, and adjectives in the Hebrew when referring to God.

ETA- and I just noticed what thread this was. I'm really not thrilled about the title/subject of the thread. It doesn't make friends and it isn't edifying.
edit on 9-10-2012 by LeSigh because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by borntowatch
Explain this, even the real Jews scratch their heads and then ignore what their own scripture teaches.

Genesis 1.

Then God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth" (Genesis 1:26).

If you can then you can go out and teach all the Rabbis and Jewish Scholars, cos they dont have an answer


God was speaking to the Angels.


So Angels can create as well, cool Angels, might just have to pray to them as well.
I have a few issues with Jehovah witness doctrine, but I will not get into an argument.
Your explanation does not answer the question. Angels dont make things.
The phrase "let us" again gives the idea of plurality. The word "us" cannot refer to angels because angels do not create.

Therefore, in the first chapter of the Bible we have a hint of the Trinity with the plural title Elohim used with a singular verb and God speaking and saying, "Let us."

Your answer would fool anyone with a basic grasp of english, not a good grasp of english and it would be laughed at in context to the Hebrew

also
The words "let us" is used elsewhere of God speaking in Genesis. After Adam and Eve sinned the Bible records.

Then the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever (Genesis 3:22).

At the incident at the Tower of Babel we read God saying.

Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another's speech (Genesis 11:7).

Isaiah the prophet recorded God saying.

Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Then I said, "Here am I. Send me" (Isaiah 6:8).

Read them in Hebrew to understand the plurality involved.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeSigh

Actual conversations in the Talmud between God and angels never use we/us pronouns. The Talmud is full of plural verbs, nouns, and adjectives in the Hebrew when referring to God.


The Talmud is Babylonian Jewish and is not accepted by true Judaism.


Originally posted by LeSigh

ETA- and I just noticed what thread this was. I'm really not thrilled about the title/subject of the thread. It doesn't make friends and it isn't edifying.


I did not start the thread.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch

So Angels can create as well, cool Angels, might just have to pray to them as well.


No. Only God created. In verse 27, it was He who created, not them or they. If the plural in verse 26 was proof of a trinity, verse 27 would also use a plural for God.


Originally posted by borntowatch

I have a few issues with Jehovah witness doctrine, but I will not get into an argument.


You might want to discuss those with a Jehovah Witness instead of me then.


Originally posted by borntowatch

Your explanation does not answer the question.


My explanation is the traditional Jewish explanation.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by truejew
 



No. Only God created. In verse 27, it was He who created, not them or they. If the plural in verse 26 was proof of a trinity, verse 27 would also use a plural for God.



The word "elohim" was often used. Elohim is plural.



My explanation is the traditional Jewish explanation.


I don't know who is more full of fecal matter, the Christians or the Jews. Neither one of you makes any sense.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by truejew
 



No. Only God created. In verse 27, it was He who created, not them or they. If the plural in verse 26 was proof of a trinity, verse 27 would also use a plural for God.



The word "elohim" was often used. Elohim is plural.


I find it strange when trinitarians and atheists think they know more about The Hebrew language than those who originally wrote the books.

To better understand the use of Elohim, read the following link.

ELOHIM AND THE PLURAL PASSAGES
edit on 10-10-2012 by truejew because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by truejew
 



I find it strange when trinitarians and atheists think they know more about The Hebrew language than those who originally wrote the books.


I find it strange to encounter a "Christian" who claims that the majority of Christianity practiced in America, a Christianity lead and endorsed by thousands of certified priests and clergymen, is a stinking pile of lies and blasphemy while THEIR specific brand of Christianity is perfect.

You know, one Christian pointing to the rest of the Christians and calling them liars. A man adhere to his faith while turning his back on it. What a feat of mind-numbing paradoxical flexibility. Never thought I'd see the day...although I can't say I'm really all that shocked.

Oh, and trust the modern world to redefine words in order to suit their purposes. It isn't as though redefining out-of-date languages as civilizations rise and fall is completely unheard of. That's part of the process by which our leaders establish their command: control how the people communicate, and you control how they think.
edit on 10-10-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by grahag
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Any religion that you can get kicked out of or is exclusive can not be a religion of peace.

Of the major religions out there, Buddhism is closest to peaceful, but a religion is only as peaceful as it's people are. Religion is inherently NOT peaceful.


I agree with you on that one.

Buddhism is the ONLY major religion in the history of the world (tribal religions excluded) that has shown a CONSISTENT effort to resist being hijacked for warfare. When was the last time you saw a Catholic Bishop , TV evangelist, Rabbi, or Islamic Cleric torch themselves to protest a war? Can anybody name a single war in history in which the Buddhists went out to violently subjugate or convert the "non-believers" so they could all go to Nirvana together?

The closest anybody can really get is that some Japanese Buddhists were conscripted to fight in WWII by the secular government...but that's a FAR CRY from a religious war.


Yeah I can
Buddhists are nasty and violent terryorisms.com...

Dont let the truth get in the way of a good lie.

Do you read
Buddhist Warfare
By Michael Jerryson, Mark Juergensmeyer
edit on 9-10-2012 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)


So...you disagree with me by citing a book that reaffirms everything I just stated. Your own link states that the exception to the rule was how the secular Japanese government sent SOME buddhists to fight in it's imperial wars and notes plain as day that Sri Lanka's history of violence has traditionally been cultural and political and has had historically very little to do with religion of any kind.

Indeed, there is only a single mention w/out a footnote of some sort of "messianic war w/ China" (WTF??) in which the Buddhist religious establishment apparently eagerly engaged in war mongering. Although...it should be noted that as a guy w/ a Master's Degree in History from a Big 10 University I have certainly not heard of any "messianic wars" between Japan and China.

I think you should probably try reading an actual history book sometime.

There is simply no documentable or empirical historical evidence to suggest that the religious establishment of Buddhism was at any time a willing participant in waging a full blown war. Pol Pot TRIED to co-opt the Theravedic Buddhists into his brand of nuttery...but they protested, dragged their feet, and finally set themselves on fire when all else failed.

Buddhists were CONSCRIPTED into the Japanese Imperial military...because...well...all Japanese men of fighting age were in the Japanese Imperial military....but at no time did the frail minority Buddhist religious structure actually ADVOCATE these wars of Imperialism.

Ironically, your buddy Mikey Jerryson's comments about all of the "Buddhists" who were in control of the Japanese military during the Russo-Japanese War more or less shows just how unbelievably ignorant he is given that the time period between 1868-1945 is typically referred to as "State Shinto" because the Japanese Empire overtly co-opted with the vast majority Shinto religion.

But hey...Shinto's...Buddhists...what's the difference when it's a couple of ignorant, country-bumpkin, white, Americans looking to feel good about themselves and Horus KRST...right? It's like splitting hairs between "Aaaayyy-Raahbs" and "Tseeks", right? Who cares that one of them happens to be Hindu while the other is Muslim...they're all brown people, right?

Everybody knows that if you have slanted eyes and a complicated alphabet you must be a Buddhist.

Once again...I am ashamed for my country that we permit such ignorant fools to simply run freely in the wild. Please accept my apologies, World.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by milominderbinder

You don't even have the most rudimentary understanding of the judeo-christian tradition...do you?


I know the trinity doctrine very well and have discussed it with many trinitarians over the past 16 years. I know that some trinitarians say the trinity is three gods in unity and some avoid calling them three gods. Those who avoid it are in denial. The trinity is three gods.



By definition, a "trinitarian" MUST believe in the Triune God...that's what the word "trinitarian" means. If you spoke to anybody who believes otherwise...then you spoke to a "nontrinitarian".

Thanks for illustrating that you don't understand LITERALLY the first major precept of the judeo-christian tradition.

I love it when people are big "believers" of their religion and yet have not ever read their own religious texts.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by LeSigh

Actual conversations in the Talmud between God and angels never use we/us pronouns. The Talmud is full of plural verbs, nouns, and adjectives in the Hebrew when referring to God.


The Talmud is Babylonian Jewish and is not accepted by true Judaism.


Originally posted by LeSigh

ETA- and I just noticed what thread this was. I'm really not thrilled about the title/subject of the thread. It doesn't make friends and it isn't edifying.


I did not start the thread.


My bad, I did mean to type Tanakh. Also, I know you didn't start the thread. I was speaking of the thread in general.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by grahag
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Any religion that you can get kicked out of or is exclusive can not be a religion of peace.

Of the major religions out there, Buddhism is closest to peaceful, but a religion is only as peaceful as it's people are. Religion is inherently NOT peaceful.


I agree with you on that one.

Buddhism is the ONLY major religion in the history of the world (tribal religions excluded) that has shown a CONSISTENT effort to resist being hijacked for warfare. When was the last time you saw a Catholic Bishop , TV evangelist, Rabbi, or Islamic Cleric torch themselves to protest a war? Can anybody name a single war in history in which the Buddhists went out to violently subjugate or convert the "non-believers" so they could all go to Nirvana together?

The closest anybody can really get is that some Japanese Buddhists were conscripted to fight in WWII by the secular government...but that's a FAR CRY from a religious war.


Buddhism and Violence (Publications of the Lumbini International Research Institute, Nepal) [Paperback]
Michael Zimmermann

There seems to be overwhelming evidence that these people with squinty eyes and funny lettering who are called Buddhists are not really the cuddly teddy bear people you want us to imagine.

Now your argument is that the ones that kill are not really Buddhists, cool argument
.www.youtube.com...


and some more
www.michaelparenti.org...

and if indeed you are saying Buddhists are violent then I apologise, I thought you were saying Buddhists are non violent.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch

Originally posted by AfterInfinity

What do the rest of the Christians on ATS have to say about this? Do they agree?



Christians believe Jehovah witnesses are a cult


Indeed, both JW's and Mormons are cults. Mormons do not believe Jesus is the physical incarnation of God in the flesh, they believe Jesus is a god but not the Almighty. They also believe they will get their own planet to populate. Neither one are of orthodox christianity.
edit on 10-10-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000


Indeed, both JW's and Mormons are cults. Mormons do not believe Jesus is the physical incarnation of God in the flesh, they believe Jesus is a god but not the Almighty. They also believe they will get their own planet to populate. Neither one are of orthodox christianity.
edit on 10-10-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)


To be a Christian one must accept the Trinity, to not accept the Trinity is denying fundamental Christianity.

Mormons, JWs and Jews are not Christian
If Jesus states "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30) and the Jews killed Jesus because he said He was God (John 10 33) The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God,"
then one would assume either Jesus was a liar and deserved death
or was God and was resurrected.
Cant have it both ways sadly, cant have Jesus as just a man and then killed because he claimed to be only a man.
If He lied His death was justified as a punishment and His resurrection would be void

The non Trinitarian argument fails under the logic of Judaism and the NT
edit on 10-10-2012 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by borntowatch
 



and the Jews killed Jesus because he said He was God (John 10 33) The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God,"
then one would assume either Jesus was a liar and deserved death
or was God and was resurrected.
Cant have it both ways sadly, cant have Jesus as just a man and then killed because he claimed to be only a man.
If He lied His death was justified as a punishment and His resurrection would be void

The non Trinitarian argument fails under the logic of Judaism and the NT


Sadly there is absolutely no "logic" in this statement...

Read John 10 from begining to end instead of picking what you like...

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Jesus didn't ever claim to be God.... Not once...

In fact He corrected them in the verse i offered which you convienently left out....

Your trinity is fabricated... Which is interesting because of your previous statement... "you can't be a christian without accepting the trinity"

Tell that to the christians that reject the trinity i guess



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



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   
John 10
10 “Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. 2 The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. 5 But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger’s voice.” 6 Jesus used this figure of speech, but the Pharisees did not understand what he was telling them.

7 Therefore Jesus said again, “Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep. 8 All who have come before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep have not listened to them. 9 I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out, and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.

11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 The hired hand is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. 13 The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.

14 “I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me— 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. 17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”

19 The Jews who heard these words were again divided. 20 Many of them said, “He is demon-possessed and raving mad. Why listen to him?”

21 But others said, “These are not the sayings of a man possessed by a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”

22 Then came the Festival of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23 and Jesus was in the temple courts walking in Solomon’s Colonnade. 24 The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”

25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.

(Here Jesus gives them eternal life, Jesus gives eternal life)

29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”


(There it is)


31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”


(The Jews can see it but you cant)



34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?
Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? 37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.” 39 Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.


(Fairly clear, I think, deny it if you like but I wont)


40 Then Jesus went back across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing in the early days. There he stayed, 41 and many people came to him. They said, “Though John never performed a sign, all that John said about this man was true.” 42 And in that place many believed in Jesus.



and what was the Baptists message? It was, Jesus was coming, and what was Jesus going to do
John the baptist said

but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His (Jesus) winnowing fan is in His hand, and He (Jesus) will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”
– Matthew 3:1-1

You must have a different John 10
edit on 10-10-2012 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
17
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join