How sad that Christians reject the good news that Jesus gave.

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by Greatest I am
 



Originally posted by Greatest I am
Jesus came to free mankind. Not enslave him the way the churches have done.


Not according to these verses:

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5)

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2)

The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48)

The ancient prophecies says that there will be a false messiah (christ) and this one will promote messages of love but will cause wars. Jesus and Yahweh fulfill these prophecies. Even today those who believe in The God of Abraham (Yahweh) are still creating wars and destruction.


Timothy was written by Paul and from my point of view Paul is a wolf in sheep clothing so it is totally unimportant.

The second one is for me about the ones who are told to do a specific thing that needs to be and will not do it for selfish reasons. I personally think the statement is missing the mark by "a mile" and therefore becomes a lie.

Yes the ones who understand have no excuses for not doing the right thing. But was ignorance of understanding ever a good excuse. If you seek understanding then you will find understanding after a great deal of work.




posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 


While I respectfully disagree with your first point, I can kind of get behind your second point. When the Bible says, "Don't do this", we have to understand why. We can't just say, "Alright, I won't do this because I don't want the wrath of God." You have to know WHY God doesn't want you to do that. It's not as if God just decrees, "Okay, don't have premarital sex" and never explains why. We know why, both through the Bible and through experience. We know premarital sex is predominantly for lustful reasons and impatience. We know the unfortunate instances of babies born out of wedlock. We know that mere premarital sex has devolved into absolute promiscuity, turning a blessing from God (sex) into what is essentially mutual masturbation. We know these things, yet we do them. But the Bible tells us not to do these things, because God has a definite reason to forbid them, and He lets us know WHY rather than just WHAT.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 

Timothy was written by Paul . . .

Those so-called letters are pseudo-Paul, meaning forgeries made to look like they were written by Paul, but originating quite a while after his death.
Try doing a search on the web, like "Timothy disputed authorship".



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Greatest I am

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


What's the name of your God anyway?


I am not an idol worshiper the way you are and have not named the God I know.
I am pleased to speak of the Godhead I know but you are not ready to hear what I say.

Regards
DL


But I think the bible really got the name of god right. Jehovah = "the existing One". The proper name of the one true God.

www.biblestudytools.com...

So I want to know from the people here why ONE?



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 11:12 PM
link   
edit on 20-6-2013 by LittleByLittle because: Nevermind



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Satan and the pink teddy bear love you more than Jesus.

Repent! The dark side has cookies!



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 

So I want to know from the people here why ONE?
Why "one" what?
Do you mean "one" God?
That comes from the ancient belief that a temple housed the god that the temple was built in order to honor.
The god who supposedly "lived" in the Jerusalem temple became, one way or another, the "national" god of the religionists associated with that temple, and that temple seemed to have been dedicated to the name, YH...
Once that was established, the connection between the temple and the god, it was then established that any worship other than at that particular temple was of "another" god, and so was declared to be idolatry.
So the "one god" comes from the one temple.
edit on 21-6-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 01:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


You should prayerfully study the Bible everyday. That way, you will be able help them correct their falsehoods. The Authorized Kings James Version, not any of the other versions.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit
 






You essentially said, "I don't think I should worship Jesus, but I can respect him as a good moral teacher and social reformer."

Well, if you don't think you should worship Jesus, then you don't think he was God. But if he wasn't God, then everything he taught is absolute insanity. That, or he was a liar.

He would be insane, because he said he was God and wasn't, but thought that he was. He would be a liar, if he said he was a God and knew that he wasn't.

So what you're saying, in essence, is that you have deep respect for either a lunatic or a conman.


I mean no offence but I just don't believe your bible all to much, I don't believe he was God because only one "God" exists. If Jesus was a conman or a loon I would still respect him... that being said I respect the wrongs that were done in wars, for instance WW2. Now I'm not a loon I have been told I have a bit of a brain too, I respect what was done because it could be. Human intelligence was used and man done what he has never before on scales unprecedented. The things done were certainly not good moral teachings on any level.

I'll add to that so people don't accuse me of being a sicko... D-day, look at all the tactics and method of warfare used a lot of them totally new and never seen before. It was great in the sense of the word. Great does not equal good either otherwise Alexander would not have been the Alexander the Great.

I respect the grain of sand also because it is the same as me fundamentally, we are both matter just connected differently and I have a little extra thing called awareness.

Compare me to a lot of the creatures of Earth and I am fundamentally the same also except for a little extra thing called reason.




But please, don't boil Jesus down to just a spiritual teacher who died for what he believed in. Because, as you said, if he "died for the good of mankind", then if he wasn't God and our redeemer, why exactly did he die for mankind? If he wasn't God and wasn't our redeemer, then he basically died for either a delusion or a lie.


Then every man/women that has ever died to protect his family or loved ones died for a lie or were delusional were they not?

If mankind is a delusion or a lie then I guess I'm a supporter of the biggest delusional lie that has ever existed.

Again I wish not to offend anyone though I can see how what I said may cause offence, I guess this is my spiritual reasoning. I have to go out now but I'll come back to this thread and myself more tonight if it is needed.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
.
Jesus is the Savior of all men, especially those who believe - I Timothy 4:10.

Lonewolf, I didn't quote all your post, as I wanted some focus. You say I don't read Scripture in context, but I see that after offering 70+ texts, you think 3 verses of Daniel negates my position, even though it seems to contradict the Scripture that I did quote. Do you not see a problem there?

Perhaps "Everlasting" is not quite that, but only "Age-Lasting." Some time in Strong's or Young's will resolve this. Now back to context - my context is this, that EVERY interpretation must align with the plain statement that God will become All in all. If any are left dead in the grave, if any are suffering in Hell or the Lake of Fire, if any are left (for any reason) in a state other than reconciliation with God, then by logic, God can not become All in all. However, the Scriptures teach that He will be, so I say boldly that therefore none will be left dead, in Hell, in the Lake of Fire, or in any state less than full reconciliation.

Have you not read the Law of the Jubilee? It states that all who are in bondage will go free at a set time, the blowing of the Jubilee Trumpet. This Law indicates a spiritual reality, and points forward to the blowing of the last Trumpet, at which time, all men will begin to go free (each in his own order) to the inheritance they have in Jesus the Christ. This is God's Will, this is God's Plan, to save all, and the Scriptures spell it out if we can only read between the lines of church tradition. Universalism was orthodox until the Council of Nicaea, which was dominated by the mostly-pagan Constantine.

Be careful to note that I am not saying we escape punishment, for many will be tossed into the Lake of Fire. The big bone of contention is whether the LoF is for destruction (by a Creator God? Maybe not...) or to burn away our wood, hay and stubble. God often describes Himself as a fire, a fire which purifies and burns away our dross. You just have to put it together. God's thoughts and ways are not like ours, and that is why He insists that vengeance is His - because He knows how to use it for our own good, not the way we do, exacting revenge with cruelty, or telling someone smugly that they are going to Hell, an eternal punishment for temporal sins, something God's Law never came close to prescribing. If the wages of sin were more than Death, God would have told us so...



It's good to see someone at ATS that can hear this Truth.As you said there are MANY scriptures that harmonize with this Truth.I've never had anyone who believes in the damnable doctrine of hell ever refute these scriptures they just say it is heretical and damn me to hell.

They truly believe in "another Jesus"(which isn't even his name) that doesn't exist except in their carnal mind.Thankfully God is the one in control and the cause of EVERYTHING.I don't judge them.They don't know what they are doing.God has sent then a strong delusion that they would believe a lie..that God is the most heinous unjust and unmerciful monster there is to sentence man to eternal punishment in hell for not believing a false doctrine of men that makes void the "LIVING word of God".Yahoshua(Yahweh IS salvation) truly IS the savor of ALL men.Man can do NOTHING to "be" saved...we are "being" saved it is not an event but a process .EVERYONE in their own order.

The pharisee of this age "search the scriptures" THINKING that in them they have life yet they FAIL to come to Yahoshua(Yahwehs salvation..the savor of ALL men) whom they are written of that he may save them in this age.
edit on 21-6-2013 by Rex282 because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-6-2013 by Rex282 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 07:55 AM
link   
reply to post by LittleByLittle
 



But I think the bible really got the name of god right. Jehovah = "the existing One". The proper name of the one true God.

www.biblestudytools.com...

So I want to know from the people here why ONE?


Because there is only one God. Unfortunately, in JMDewey's response to you, he doesn't understand the nature of God and that Yahweh/Jehovah/Jesus were all one and the same who's names were all derived from the Tetragrammaton and were used to describe the nature of God.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Lazarus Short
 


I offered only 2 instances in the OT and one instance in the NT, there are others I didn't mention. Do you know what Yom Kippur is? Might want to study up on it in Leviticus 16, and then go read Matthew 25:31-46. While you're at that you might also want to take a peak at Zechariah 14. Believe me, i'd love for everyone to be saved, but it ain't gonna happen because we have a God who punishes evil, a righteous God must. Without Christ they are still under God's judgement. There is a process for salvation, they have to accept Christ's sacrifice, they have to call on his name. It is written that whosever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved, but not all people will call on his name as is the case we are seeing today and you only have until you die. There are no second chances after death because you have no mouth to confess your sins and dead people cannot repent.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Rex282
 


My Brother!




posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Rex282
 

They truly believe in "another Jesus"(which isn't even his name) that doesn't exist except in their carnal mind.Thankfully God is the one in control and the cause of EVERYTHING.I don't judge them.They don't know what they are doing.God has sent then a strong delusion that they would believe a lie..that God is the most heinous unjust and unmerciful monster there is to sentence man to eternal punishment in hell for not believing a false doctrine of men that makes void the "LIVING word of God".Yahoshua(Yahweh IS salvation) truly IS the savor of ALL men.Man can do NOTHING to "be" saved...we are "being" saved it is not an event but a process .EVERYONE in their own order.
If anyone believes in "another Jesus", I would say that it is people like yourself who refute the Jesus of the New Testament by first not accepting the accuracy of it by claiming that they did not get his name right and somehow introduced a name that is not his "real" name.
Then claiming there is no hell when that was fundamental to the NT Jesus' teaching, which is that those who do not do right will be punished in hell.
You also have a funny idea of what the word "saved" means in the NT. Salvation meant to the writers a divine protection that comes to people who inter into Christ's church. You use to promote your idea of being saved with a quote from one of the so-called Timothy letters which is not widely supported by modern biblical scholarship as being an authentic writing of Paul, and so is a forgery and not dependable for basing doctrine on. You may think that it is but the quote that you would use to back that up comes from the exact same book.
edit on 21-6-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 



Lonewolf:

As I have stated before on ATS, there are three main Christian theories about what happens after we die:

1. We go to heaven/new earth or hell - ET (Eternal Torment).

2. We go to heaven/new earth or get destroyed – ED (Eternal Destruction).

3. We go to heaven/new earth or get thrown in the Lake of Fire for purification, to be resurrected later - UR (Universal Reconciliation).

It is important to realize, as we discuss, that the Bible SEEMS to promote all three. James Bruggeman, who taught me UR, admitted that years ago. I adhere to UR for these reasons:

It is consistent with the Biblical concept that God will become All in all. If people are still dead and/or in hell, how can that be? I don’t think Damnationists can answer it.

It is consistent with the Biblical concept of limited punishment, as seen all through the Law given to Moses. No greater punishment was prescribed than death. Now, if the wages of sin is death, why did not God tell us (if ET or ED is correct) that the wages of sin were death + hell and/or destruction. ED is a bit absurd here, saying in effect, that the wages of sin is death and death. If you are correct, God did not warn us enough about death and hell, but frittered away endless chapters of the OT railing against unfaithful Israel. Do Damnationists have an answer to limited punishment for temporal sins? Maybe not.

It is consistent with the Law of the Jubilee, which states that at a set time, ALL people who are in bondage (read: sin) go free, to return to their lands/possessions/inheritance. At the next coming of Jesus the Christ, the last Jubilee Trumpet sounds, and all will begin to go free, each in his own order, as the Bible says. I think Damnationists miss this entirely.

It is consistent with the concept of the Kingdom of Heaven, which we find in the Bible, but not with the concept of Hell, which my research has proven to have proceeded from pagan mythology, bad theology, bad translation, and works of fiction such as Dante and Milton. The closest thing we can come up with is the Lake of Fire, which is arguably for purification. Remember that Death and Hell (actually the Grave) are cast into the LoF, after which no one can be dead or in the grave anymore, praise God!

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it is consistent with the nature and character of God, who is a God of love, creation, correction, and the unfolding of the universe and each individual human soul, whose seed (as Genesis states) is within itself. Damnationists can not answer why a God of Love would relegate most of humanity to hell for eternity. Unbelievers see this very clearly, as I have leaned here on ATS.

So, Lonewolf, can you see past church traditions, translations, theology, and fictions, to see the Truth? Remember, UR was orthodoxy until the corrupt Council of Nicaea.





edit on 21-6-2013 by Lazarus Short because: lah-de-dah



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Lazarus Short
 

. . . Death and Hell (actually the Grave) are cast into the LoF, after which no one can be dead or in the grave anymore . . .
Or . . you are reading Revelation which is full of symbolism and "Death and Hell" is actually one of the characters in the vision, going back to Canaanite mythology of the battle between the god Baal of the shy, and Death, the god of Hell.
In that case, it is just showing the ultimate victorious outcome of our god, rather than an exposition on what people's chances are of whether they might end up in a Hades type environment or not.
edit on 21-6-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Are you kidding?! I don't refer back to Canaanite mythology, why do you? The Revelation said it, I believe it, that settles it.



posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
...............If anyone believes in "another Jesus", I would say that it is people like yourself who refute the Jesus of the New Testament by first not accepting the accuracy of it by claiming that they did not get his name right and somehow introduced a name that is not his "real" name.
Then claiming there is no hell when that was fundamental to the NT Jesus' teaching, which is that those who do not do right will be punished in hell.


That's your "reason Jesus is sending billions to hell.."Those who don't "do right"..that has ZERO basis in The Truth and the scriptures.You know neither the scriptures nor the power of God.

I do not believe in another "Jesus" at all.The irrefutable fact is Jesus is not Yahoshuas name.(nature).The semantics of the spelling is a periphery.Yahoshua was a Jew.Yahoshua is his name in Hebrew.Which was translated to the Greek Iesous (and of course both are translated into the written form of English).Yahoshua means Yahweh is salvation.That is an undeniable fact.There are many, many scriptures that harmonize with that fact.THAT is his name. ...his very nature that never changes.If he is not the savior of ALL he is a complete failure and not the Son of God or the christ.That is what you believe with your false doctrine of men of the blasphemy of hell.

The fact is the 1st edition of 1611 King James bible had over 50,000 known errors however ..the name "Jesus" is not in it...it is written as the the Greek Iesous....the way it was written by the authors.Jesus is the Latinized version that developed by the 1700's.I am not arguing of the spelling but the blatant disregard and contempt to what a name means especially of the name that is above ALL names.It is not just a "word" you call someone to identify them ..it is their nature...and most assuredly this is true of Yahoshua more than anyone.His nature is always what the scriptures mean by the "name" of Yahoshua.

This blindness you have is the core of what the believers of the blasphemous doctrine of eternal punishment of hell don't (can't) perceive.They believe in their religious Jesus ..not Yahoshua ..Yahweh IS salvation..yesterday, today and forever the savior of ALL. Here are just a few of the many scriptures that support that Truth 100%.

1 Cor 15:22For as in Adam ALL die, even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive.

Philp 2:9Why God also has highly exalted him, and given him a NAME (Yahoshua... God is salvation) which is above EVERY name: That at the name of Jesus(Yahoshua) EVERY knee will bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that EVERY tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

1Timothy 2:3For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God OUR Savior;Who WILL have ALL men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering towards us, NOT WILLING that ANY should perish, but that ALL will come to repentance."

Titus 2:11 The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to ALL MEN."

1 John 4:14 We have seen, and do testify, that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior(Yahoshua) of the WORLD."

John 12:47And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him NOT: for I came NOT TO JUDGE the world, but to SAVE the world.

1 Tim. 4:9-11 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance. For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, Who IS the Savior of ALL MEN, especially of those who believe. These things command and teach."

2 Cor. 5:14 Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for ALL, and therefore ALL died."

Please point out which one of these scriptures say Yahoshua isn't saving EVERYONE .It is YOU that believes lies because God has given you a great delusion whether you believe Pauls writing is authentic or not is irrelevant.The fact is you don't know Yahoshua at all by the admission of your own words.You are doing exactly what Matthew 7 says ..judging with unrighteous judgement.You are of "the many" that enter though the wide gate and the broad path that leads to destruction that say ..Lord, Lord have we not prophesied in YOUR NAME and done many good works in YOUR NAME...and he will say TO YOU ..I never knew you.

It is YOU that don't believe Yahoshua is the Son of God, the christ because the Father has not revealed it to you.You believe in your religions fundamental teaching(your words) that Jesus is sending billions to the eternal punishment of hell for not "believing" in him.. completely in contradiction with his nature and the scriptures.You are VERY fortunate your blasphemous doctrine of men is not true or you would find yourself receiving the judgement you are judging with.It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God when you have blasphemed..may God have mercy on you.
edit on 22-6-2013 by Rex282 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Rex282
 


I agree with you, Rex. Besides what has been done to the name of the Son, consider what has been done to the name of the Father. In so many Bibles the name YHVH, transliterated as Yahweh, is just rendered as LORD. Not only do the translators rob their LORD God Yahweh of His proper name, look what they do with the proper names of all those pagan gods whose names God told us not to mention or utter. Yup, they are transliterated very nicely. If that is not blasphemy, it is close, and the KJV is guilty along with many other translations.



posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 06:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Lazarus Short
 

Are you kidding?!
No, I am not "kidding". I am being very serious.

I don't refer back to Canaanite mythology, why do you?
The question should be whether the writer of Revelation, John, is using mythology for his symbology. The obvious answer is yes, in a lot of cases. You can not explain them all by places in the Old Testament. For example, the war with the dragon is a retelling of the myth of Marduk.
You may not want to admit it to yourself but a lot of the old testament ideas about things comes directly from Canaanite mythology. The OT god was originally a Baal, and also Moloch (titles appropriated for the OT deity person). There is no such thing as a "pure" Hebrew religion that does not have elements that come from culture that the people came from and still lived in all along, that never went away. That sort of thing was only compounded later by influences from the Babylonians and the Persians who gave John the Marduk myth. You can also see in Revelation Greek and Roman influences, such as the "thousand years" itself which comes directly from the Roman imperial cult.

The Revelation said it, I believe it, that settles it.
Do you believe everything in Revelation is literal?
edit on 22-6-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join