The True Message Of Christ

page: 7
20
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 3 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 



I don't care. It doesn't interest me


Is that how you normally draw your conclusions?




posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Does this make sense to you.. or to anyone..?

The True Message of Christ

Condemning a small segment of the population based solely on their sexual orientation.



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Dude...have faith. Isn't that what you've been telling me? Who cares if it doesn't make sense? Duh.

/sarcasm
edit on 4-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


As I've been explaining to you all along there is a rational basis for faith in Jesus Christ, the problem though with many people, is that they lack the imagination, and the courage, by which to fathom what it means and signifies in regards to their own true value in the grand scheme of things. For some reason many people would rather reduce the statue of the human being from child of God to that of a "thing" or an "animal" nothing more, those are the lengths to which they, the atheists, will go to avoid the implication of what we really are, in God.



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 



As I've been explaining to you all along there is a rational basis for faith in Jesus Christ, the problem though with many people, is that they lack the imagination, and the courage, by which to fathom what it means and signifies in regards to their own true value in the grand scheme of things.


Science is only imagination insofar as you are experimenting with methods of discovering and verifying the truth. After that, imagination is what you do with the truth. Imagination is not the truth itself.

So if you are employing imagination in your interpretations, I'm not inclined to trust the results as they are just as likely to be based on what you WANT it to mean rather than what it PROBABLY or DOES mean.


For some reason many people would rather reduce the statue of the human being from child of God to that of a "thing" or an "animal" nothing more, those are the lengths to which they, the atheists, will go to avoid the implication of what we really are, in God.


I have much the same biology as most mammals that would be declared as animals by the scientific community. I share much the same functions and instincts as they do, as well as the same resources and the same requirements. Having established such commonalities as facts, you would be sorely amiss to deny that I or any member of our species is an animal.

We. Are. Animals. And if you deny this, I would speculate as to the hubris and arrogance that drives such a statement. After all, what reason would you have for denying such an obvious reality except that you don't feel satisfied or content with it? You are better than the animals, so you would hate to be considered one. You are superior to the other mammals of this world, so why would you want to be classified as belonging to their kingdom or phylum?

This is why I cling to science. Science cares not for what you want or what you prefer. It is based in, on, and around facts.
edit on 4-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I am referring to consciousness and self awareness and to a depth of personal spiritual experience from whose point of reference, the idea that we are nothing but a "thing" or an "animal" is absurd.

It just doesn't jive with the qualia of one's own experience.

I'm not suggesting that we are not an animal, only that the attempt to reduce us to that stature and level and nothing more is an absurd attempt by the atheist to deny the spiritual dimension, to deny God and our relationship with God in Spirit and Truth.




God has made your spirits with wings to fly in the spacious firmament of love and freedom. How pitiful then would it be if you were to cut off your wings by your own hand and suffering yourselves to crawl like vermin upon the earth?

~ Kahlil Gibran from "The Prophet"



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 



I'm not suggesting that we are not an animal, only that the attempt to reduce us to that stature and level and nothing more is an absurd attempt by the atheist to deny the spiritual dimension, to deny God and our relationship with God in Spirit and Truth.

I have come to the conclusion, recently, that DREAMING is indicative of having a "soul". Any creature that "dreams" is travelling to other dimensions THAT EXIST.... while they sleep.

ergo, dreaming = having a soul.

Just my latest hypothesis. Animals are AWESOME. (And DOLPHINS ARE PEOPLE. India just said so.
)

edit on 11/4/13 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I think that the true message of Christ, aside from "I love you as I am loved" is something along the lines of "you can have your cake and eat it too". It is also one of protection from predation by "powers and principalities" such that instead of eat or be eaten it's "here, eat of me".

All in all it represents a resolution from "above" or from an incorruptible center and source, which resolves the fundamental predicament of standing next the Godhead, so it represents a right relationship with the Godhead where life and eternal life is extended as a free gift.

"The supreme challenge of Christianity is how to receive a gift of incalculable value, for which there is nothing you can do to either earn or deserve."
~ C.S. Lewis, prior atheist who recognized the genius of what is presented by God via Jesus Christ and his Great Work.

All ye atheists rail against it all you want, it doesn't change the nature of what is being offered nor the value of the gift.



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Ralphy
 


I've always said that the best way to fix religion is to remove its god. Stop focusing on pleasing the sky being and get to follow the teachings of your religion. Treat each other with love and respect and everything else will fall into place. And I can't abide a god that is in need of constant reassurance of how great he is. Let me live a life of quiet morality and if that isn't good enough for any god, well then that is not a god I want any part of.



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


You conveniently missed the point of my post and the scriptural texts. You are reducing 'love' to a couple of texts of scripture without the requisite definition.

You are picking and choosing which text's you listen to and ignoring the rest. Yes, all the law hangs on the two commandments, but what does the law say?

Reread my post, you are the one in error as you are ignoring the particulars of the law. To Love God is defined by God in the fist 4 of the Ten commandments, to love your fellow man is Defined by God in the last 6 of the commandments. That's a fact. The very text you quote actually proves my point.

"Love" is not an abstract concept. There is Love that God finds acceptable, and love that God finds unacceptable.

"15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever."

1 John 2

What you are mixing up is modern tolerance and Biblically defined Love. These are as far as the east is from the west.

Ideally Modern tolerance has no concern for a person other than they not infringe on the rights of others. [the laissez faire approach]

God's love discriminates against certain behaviors and practices, but at the same time contains only the utmost desire for the good of that person. [the love the sinner, hate the sin approach]

The first is human love: transient, inconsistent, changeable, unrealiable, temporary.
The second is Divine love: consistent, dependable, unchanging, transformational, and eternal.

You accuse Christians of not showing love, if its the first, then that is fine, because that is not God's love. If its the second that is a shame because that is God's love.

Yet you would do well to be careful when you poin the finger, lest you be caught in doing the very thing you are accusing others of.



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by DanZek
 


So what's your point? Jesus' two commandments were to love God and one another, it doesn't get any more clear than that.

Love God and love others, all of the Law hangs on those two commandments. Jesus' entire message was that of pure and perfect love. His two commandments covered everything else that he taught, EVERYTHING. To deny that is to deny what he stood for, which was love.

The two commandments he told us to keep are what he said would keep us in his love and his Father's love. Two commandments, both telling us to LOVE, that covered ALL OF THE LAW, including his own.

Love was his message, you are trying to deny that fact. Why are you trying to deny that?
edit on 4-11-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   
The true message of Christ is a great LIGHT of reason, logic, truth, and love, in a dark world.

It was supposed to be undeniable and unstoppable, but people and politics got in the way, or tried to get in the way of it, to own it, control it, distort it, interpret it, talk ABOUT it, externalize it, objectify it, use it as a weapon etc,. etc.





top topics
 
20
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join