A New Interpretation (The message confiscated by the church)

page: 9
19
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


What claim, sir?


I do like your name btw. but please be specific, which claim...




posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


You are incorrectly quoting the Bible . Rev. 13 verse 10 stated that he who kills with the sword must be killed with the sword ( not actual quote ) .



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Don't you think it's funny how the OP called this a "New Interpretation"


Yet he is sent by God to deliver this message?



Since when would God have an interpretation? God doesn't deal in interpretation, he deals in the exact fact of what is or isn't.


That's the biggest contradiction, maybe, that what the OP says is just.... just.... despicable, even.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by tgalahan2
 


I admit what I said was based on an assumption... I've seen many "preachers" come and go... and I've got many of them banned myself simply due to their own frustration in not being able to answer the simplest of questions about the bible...

Though again, since you've been banned several times as you claim... Lets just see if you can actually refrain from being banned for a while... Then perhaps we'll chat more...

You seem to be quite hostile from what I've seen from your posts in this thread...

And if you can't refrain from hostilities on a simple forum... How would one believe you can be peaceful in the temple in which you reside?




posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


So grace is about forgiveness is it. The Buddha most certainly did teach about forgiveness. The story of the man spitting in his face is only one example of his teaching on it. Or will you say they are not the same now?

What is forgiveness other than love for others? Buddha taught of both and he predates Jesus by 500 years.
edit on 11-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 11-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)


Buddha taught to forgive based on human understanding. We will feel better when we forgive. Even atheist will agree that when we let go of things and forgive that we feel better. So understanding this he also believed that being able to forgive would bring him closer to enlightenment. And he was right. Jesus says if you forgive you will be forgiven, if you show mercy than you receive mercy.

Christ taught to forgive because you are forgiven. There is quite a fundamental difference. Forgiving to reach enlightenment is man working towards his freedom. Jesus taught forgive because you are forgiven. Asking you to forgive not to receive but to give out of love. Jesus taught if we repent and love our neighbor than we have received everything we needed through Grace.

Here is a man that I believe says it better than me.
www.oshoteachings.com...



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by tgalahan2
 


Where you wrote , Jesus stated that who would say the resurrection has occurred yet are lying . Jesus was raised from the dead on the third day . Raised means resurrected . Some dead saints were resurected when Jesus was raised up Matthew 27 verse 53 .I believe he called them the First Fruits .



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


No I'm not there are other versions as well that support my interpretation, though there are some that say it the way you mean as well. So who's right?



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


I like you, and I like the Cheshire Cat.


Unfortunately, as much as I do not like Hitler and even though it may go against the Bible what he says...


It seems all too true at times, and that was something along the lines of "we live in a world of neverending strife"

Now, the Bible says don't strife.

The Bible also says on Earth at it is in Heaven.




So where do I get off being so forceful?



I haven't quite pin pointed the cause of that yet in all honesty, but...


I just think, we live on a planet that is a mix of demons and angels. Those going up and those going down. Those at risk of going down and those that are going down trying to pretend like they are going up (as in lying, to bring others down)

And it's a sick fight, and it's going to get worse according to the Bible. The Tribulation, the very last days, are... well... according to scripture, supposed to be the worst days that there are. of all times.



I think one of the most complicated questions from the Bible is conduct. and you've presented a great question, that I haven't really fully understood the answer to.

Jesus gets angry, he calls people fools, God from the OT downright tears people a new one verbally.

So, I guess I'll ask... Where does the Bible really say that you should conduct yourself in a way that is entirely... I suppose, passive, and unforceful... or unangry...? The Bible talks about Honor (respect) and it says don't call your brothers "fool" (Unless you're Jesus, of course, as he is not our brother, hence he did not break the commandment. I do challenge you to find one place in the Bible where Jesus is called "our brother". Yet many still claim he is. That's not correct. Your Everlasting Father is not your Brother.)

It does say if you're attacked, turn the other cheek. But it doesn't say anything about if Gospel is being misportrayed then turn the other cheek, it says to correct. I believe.... a person should be "situationally" or "circumstantially" honorable. As in... I might say "bitches" or "m#$#f#$ers" or say things that SEEM very offensive. But, if you notice... "situationally" and "circumstancially" I haven't really offended anyone personally, and I really strive not to do so. That, to me, is what honor is and what is important, not simply just words. The most awful words can be used to offend someone greatly, or they can be used and not really offend anyone at all. I believe you and others are simply gauging my honor and disrespect by my "words" i'm using, when you should be gauging my honor and respect towards you by how I make you feel, but when you do that, make sure you have something substantial which shows that I have said something directly that offended you, and not an over all message.

I may have an overall message that does indeed offend you, but that isn't a direct intention of mine, nor should it be on my shoulders the blame for you feeling said disrespect or dishonor.

So, I challenge you, show me a direct statement... involving cruel wording or not... that did offend you on a hurtable level. I'm quite sure you can't. but if you can, I'm sorry. i'm not, though i strive to be, perfect.


I am, I'm very angry at the world. Not as angry as God is, I'm not God, but... I am angry at it.


**If that's all then, take care Akragon.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


But not everyone forgives, you admitted that yourself earlier. There is no difference between the two. To forgive is to forgive, it doesn't matter whether the other person forgives you or not. Jesus proved that when he forgave those who killed him on the cross.

First you say Jesus was the first to teach about love and forgiveness but now that I have proven you wrong you are backtracking, assuming that Buddha didn't mean forgiveness in the same way. How can you be so sure? Are you only assuming how he meant it?



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


"Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus," Timothy 2:17

"who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some." Timothy 2:18



Yes, yes... The raising of Jesus again on the Third day, which I did not despute! You worded that as though I disputed that, and I didn't.

anyhow, the Raising of Jesus again is, of course, a resurrection, but it's best to call it the revival, and raising of Jesus from the Dead, as to not confuse it with the other ressurection or RETURN of Jesus.


The first is the revival, raising from the Dead.


The second is Jesus' return (you know, when everyone says Jesus is coming back.) and the raising (resurrection) of the dead, this is the resurrection, also known as the 2nd coming of Christ.




Please, get that right.


The resurrection has not yet occurred. and Timothy is not the only one that says that in the Bible if you need more scriptural evidence.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


Jesus IS the first to explain Love or anything. Jesus was the first to do anything.


But, you would have known him as God. "I Am" or The Almighty, before the New Testament.


Anything Buddha or any one of the like learned or taught falsely were all bastardizations just like anything is, of the one Truth and the Highest Truth of Love and that is Jesus Christ.


Jesus was around long before any of the fellows or anyone in history you can name, plato... buddha, whoever..

"I am the Beginning and the end, the alpha and omega" God from the OT says this

and "I am the Beginning and the end, the alpha and omega" Jesus from the NT says the exact same thing.




Thank you.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Do not flee from these Truths, my ATS soldiers!!!!



Allow Jesus to embrace, and love, and forgive you!!


He loves you so, so dearly. A Love that is far from ever fathomable.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by tgalahan2
 


You know who else Jesus said was the beginning and the end? Us, take a look at his parable about the workers in the field.

In your opinion, Jesus is the one who hired the workers, right? So if the workers were everyday people like you and me, why would he say that the first of them will be last and the last first?

Alpha and Omega mean first and last right? So if the first was last and the last first then all the workers were the Alpha and Omega.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


But not everyone forgives, you admitted that yourself earlier. There is no difference between the two. To forgive is to forgive, it doesn't matter whether the other person forgives you or not. Jesus proved that when he forgave those who killed him on the cross.

First you say Jesus was the first to teach about love and forgiveness but now that I have proven you wrong you are backtracking, assuming that Buddha didn't mean forgiveness in the same way. How can you be so sure? Are you only assuming how he meant it?


I know what you believe and you know what I believe. At this point I will leave you with this. It is my belief that many people today have accepted the message that Christ taught through other places. But the message originated from him.

At this point in time it will be impossible for anyone to convince you that what you currently believe originated from Christ. And it will never be possible for anyone to convince me that it did not.

We have agreed on what is most important, that we are here to love one another. Because you know love I assume we are brothers.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


So how did it originate with the incarnate Christ in the first century when Buddha taught about it 500 years earlier? Are you saying that Buddha got his knowledge from Jesus? How can you assume that when Buddha lived before Jesus. If anything, Jesus would have gotten the information from Buddha since he came after.

First it was Jesus who taught it first, then it was Jesus taught it differently than Buddha, and now Buddha received it from Jesus. Backtracking....

I'm not forcing anything on you, just trying to get a clearer understanding on what you believe.
edit on 11-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 11-1-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by tgalahan2
 



I do challenge you to find one place in the Bible where Jesus is called "our brother".


If he called others "brother" could we not do the same?

47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.

48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?

49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.


Yet many still claim he is. That's not correct. Your Everlasting Father is not your Brother.)


I would call him brother before I called him Father...

Jesus is not God my friend... and please don't start posting endless scripture that assumes he is... I've seen every argument under the sun about that topic.

Not to mention the argument ALWAYS ruins a good thread


So, I challenge you, show me a direct statement... involving cruel wording or not... that did offend you on a hurtable level. I'm quite sure you can't. but if you can, I'm sorry. i'm not, though i strive to be, perfect.


Does being angry at things you can't change make you feel better or worse?




posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Of course not! Everyone knows that we're his brother but he's not ours! Blasphemy!



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


The old axiom live by the sword and die by the sword came from the bible . Where did you find your version ?



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


The NIV, though others say the same and others don't. The KJV has your version of it and other do and don't as well.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by tgalahan2
 


Have you ever heard of Preterism ? Those people believed for some odd reason that Tribulation and the Abomination of Desolation has already happened and the Rapture had already occured . This has absolutely nothing to do with the death and resurection of Christ . Yes they are working contrary to Christ .





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join