The Nature of Man

a reply to: chizay

I believe sin is an evil concept. For without the idea of an inevitable pulling towards the dark side we can trust each other easily. And with trust you will see the true nature of man. And it is so beautiful, so far from evil.

Sin has nothing to do with an inevitable pulling towards the dark side. Its just part of your flesh. Its natural. Thats the point of my post. Your right with trust you do see the true nature of man. Germany trusted Hitler millions of Jews were killed because of that trust. The trust was misplace in the nature of man. It always is. Your on a conspiracy website. Surely you are aware that the governments of the world are not the common mans friend. My Mom trusted my Dad for 23 years and he cheated on her and they are now divorced. Man's true nature does show with trust, and its shown because all men break trust. ALL. We are all liars. We aren't taught to lie. Its not learned. We just know we can do it with language, and even children do it.

Children however are viewed as sinless until their mental capability is mature enough to understand the concepts. Jews traditionally hold this at the age of 13.

21 Then his servants said to him, “What is this thing that you have done? You fasted and wept for the child while he was alive; but when the child died, you arose and ate food.” 22 He said, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept, for I said, p‘Who knows whether the Lord will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ 23 But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, qbut he will not return to me.”

This is from 2 Samuel 12. The context is King David committed adultery, had a baby, and God took the child in death as consequence for his sin. Notice, that King David says his child will not return but that he will go to Him. People who cannot believe are forgiven, God is perfectly Just.

a reply to: Akragon

Except Luke 14

23 And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled.

24 For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.

25 And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them,

26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

Comes straight from the mouth of Christ. First who cares if it comes from Paul? Second it definitely is not only from Paul as shown above. I actually didn't even mention any of Paul's writings. Romans 7 was mentioned and it is very on topic. Its great Scripture. You have no historical reason for rejecting as such, so until you do why don't ya quite spouting silliness.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Tragic that you don't understand that passage... I'll help you

Jesus does not mean you have to hate your family and friends to be his disciple...

This is an analogy meaning "the spirit is more important then the flesh"... which is a concept found throughout the gospels...

You're pushing original sin, which is from Paul... and that children are born sinful which is a lie... and also from Paul...

the only silliness I can see is in the original post... but again, that isn't from you...

its Paul's influence over you...

a reply to: Calalini

Let's look at sexual behavior. For a young man, when he's in his sexual prime, his mind is on sex. That's not Satan. It's not sin. It's absolutely normal and healthy to have a sex drive when you're a young man, just as it's natural to want to procreate because your body is telling you it's time. These are natural urges. They have nothing to do with evil/sin. Satan is not 'tempting' you.

The desire for marriage is also a natural thing that occurs not only in humans but also other parts of nature, for example the malagasy giant rat.

And you are partially agreeing with my post. We are all sinners by nature. That means sin is NATURAL. You just don't want to use the word sin. As I explained above sin is part of our essence. Its part of who and what we are . I don't see different levels of sin. Now sex drives are normal and healthy, how about rapist? They have sex drives, and its natural. I've seen a chimp rape a frogs mouth.

"It's why we go to wars to protect our interests.."

I think only humans wage war, seeing as how war is an abstract concept and animals lack the cognitive ability to understand and plan complex concepts like war.

a reply to: Akragon

Jesus does not mean you have to hate your family and friends to be his disciple... This is an analogy meaning "the spirit is more important then the flesh"... which is a concept found throughout the gospels...

Its not saying the spirit is more important than the flesh, but that the spirit is battling the flesh(sinful nature). I hate the sin within me and within you and within my mother. That doesn't mean I don't love your soul and care for your soul. You have been terribly deceived. Christians are baffled by your responses not because their intelligent but because they hold no merit.

a reply to: Sremmos80

You don't need to friend thats not what I am saying. Hating the sin within us comes from recognizing it. Has nothing to do with me actually hating everything about my life. On a metaphysical level however I recognize that soul is separate from the filth in the flesh and its separate because I feel the cleansing of the Spirit of God on my soul but not my flesh. And romans 7 quoted about explains exactly how I feel when it comes to the battle between flesh and spirit.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Actually Christians are baffled by my responses because they're logical... and make a lot more sense then Christian doctrine...

there is an obvious reason why Christians run from me... or they just give up because they have no reply that would make sense once the holes in their theology are exposed

Im quite used to it.... and I suppose I should say "I know you are but what am i" when it comes to the "deceived" part...

Next it will get personal and you'll start insulting me... Which as everyone can see, has already begun...its routine, most of you follow the same line of arguement... Confusion, frustraton, insults

I know I frustrate you but that's because you have nothing when it comes to facing the truth... but its ok

Believe whatever makes you happy

Oh... and by the way...

Its not saying the spirit is more important than the flesh, but that the spirit is battling the flesh(sinful nature).

See what I mean... you exude Paulianity

In almost everything you say in religious threads

a reply to: Akragon

Actually Christians are baffled by my responses because they're logical... and make a lot more sense then Christian doctrine...

Not at all. I love logic. You however are actually bringing forth a claim muslims have made for years, and it is always your little fall back plan whenever you have nothing of real value to say. I will be honest occasionally you bring up good point, but when you can't you bring up the Paul issue everytime.

there is an obvious reason why Christians run from me... or they just give up because they have no reply that would make sense once the holes in their theology are exposed

The truth is most of us can tell your not trying to have a conversation but rather just discredit anything to do with traditional Christianity.

Not gonna insult you or anything I don't care if you want to post dishonestly all the time. Just don't get mad when I point it out.

To be honest I really don't like using the word flesh to describe Sin. Sin is rooted in the flesh, but the flesh is not always sinful. Sin starts in a man's heart as Jesus said "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin." Anytime the Bible talks about sin and the spirit they are in complete opposition. Yet above you are trying to preach that the Bible only tells us one is more important than the other and while that is true that is not the bulk of the message.

John 3
3 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 2 This man came to Jesus[a] by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.” 3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.[c] 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You[d] must be born again.’ 8 The wind[e] blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”


Only those born of the Spirit can enter heaven. Because flesh until then is a slave to sin. Only through Christ can that bondage be set free.

a reply to: Akragon

I'm not aware of any writings from Paul before his conversion.

a reply to: Akragon

there is an obvious reason why Christians run from me...

Now friend you know that isn't true. :-P

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

You however are actually bringing forth a claim muslims have made for years, and it is always your little fall back plan whenever you have nothing of real value to say. I will be honest occasionally you bring up good point, but when you can't you bring up the Paul issue everytime.

its not a "fall back" as you claim... I bring Paul up because everything that is wrong with Christianity has to do with the OT or Paul...

The truth is most of us can tell your not trying to have a conversation but rather just discredit anything to do with traditional Christianity.

Not gonna insult you or anything I don't care if you want to post dishonestly all the time. Just don't get mad when I point it out.

too late... and now you've called me a liar as well...

Just because I don't agree with your religion or your version of Christianity does not mean I am lying...

Feel free to point out where exactly I lied...

To be honest I really don't like using the word flesh to describe Sin. Sin is rooted in the flesh, but the flesh is not always sinful. Sin starts in a man's heart as Jesus said "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin." Anytime the Bible talks about sin and the spirit they are in complete opposition. Yet above you are trying to preach that the Bible only tells us one is more important than the other and while that is true that is not the bulk of the message

As anyone can clearly read, I did not say the spirit being more important then the flesh is the only thing the bible teaches... Now who's lying...

Only those born of the Spirit can enter heaven. Because flesh until then is a slave to sin. Only through Christ can that bondage be set free.

Way to stay true to form... use a passage from the gospels... then back to Paul...

how sad...

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Akragon

I'm not aware of any writings from Paul before his conversion.

Where did I say that?

And where have YOU been anyways?

Now friend you know that isn't true. :-P

Well for the most part it is... there are exceptions to every rule of course...

a reply to: Akragon

Well, I just got a new PC. When they changed the format of the website I couldn't use it any longer on my cell. Did you miss me??

And you said something about 'stop quoting the Pharisee', (Paul I imagine you were referring to), and my point was that I'm not aware of any writings from him from his days as a Pharisee before his conversion to Christianity.

I do need to re-learn my HTML and the layout of the site is still pretty tricky... :-/

a reply to: NOTurTypical

OF COURSE I missed you... Geez man!!



Technically I said you should ditch the Pharisee... but that's neither here nor there...

It seems to me...IF one considers when Acts was written, lets say 15 some odd years after his conversion... He claimed to be a Pharisee...

Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.

6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.

a reply to: Akragon

Oh I know he was a Pharisee, he studied directly under Gameliel himself. But when he accepted Christ as the Moshiach Nagid (Messiah the King) that pretty much ended his stature and prestige as a Pharisee. Those days were over and he would have been under a sentence of death for blasphemy.

a reply to: Akragon

OF COURSE I missed you... Geez man!!

I was just giving you a few years to catch up to my post count. lol

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Akragon

OF COURSE I missed you... Geez man!!

I was just giving you a few years to catch up to my post count. lol

Heh... it all makes sense now...

Why would you think he would make such a claim... He didn't say "I was a Pharisee"... He said I AM a Pharisee...

The interesting thing is... He didn't need his stature as a Pharisee anymore anyways... He was the leader of the new religion... even the founder of it...

He certainly had some issues with the OT laws, but that still doesn't explain his claim...

a reply to: Akragon

Why would you think he would make such a claim... He didn't say "I was a Pharisee"... He said I AM a Pharisee...

Well, I don't want to get in the absurdly rigid subtleties of the Koine Greek, but if you demand a past tense reference then see Philippians 3:5.

The interesting thing is... He didn't need his stature as a Pharisee anymore anyways... He was the leader of the new religion... even the founder of it... He certainly had some issues with the OT laws, but that still doesn't explain his claim...

I don't agree with that, Jesus was the "founder", and even that I only agree to for the sake of argument. Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law and prophets. And it was Him who sent the disciples out to teach the gospel of grace. Furthermore, Paul had his conversion after the others even Stephen, and after Jesus' half-brothers James and Judas. He was just the apostle sent to the gentiles. Peter wanted that assignment, but he was sent to Iraq and the large gathering of Jews who lived at that time in Babylon.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Well, I don't want to get in the absurdly rigid subtleties of the Koine Greek, but if you demand a past tense reference then see Philippians 3:5.

kinda reinforces my point... eh?

I don't agree with that, Jesus was the "founder", and even that I only agree to for the sake of argument. Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law and prophets. And it was Him who sent the disciples out to teach the gospel of grace.

Except Jesus said nothing of Grace... that was Paul that taught "grace"...

Furthermore, Paul had his conversion after the others even Stephen. He was just the apostle sent to the gentiles. Peter wanted that assignment, but he was sent to Iraq and the large gathering of Jews who lived at that time in Babylon.

Yeah it seems Peter was actually the "apostle to the gentiles"... but somehow Paul took that job...

Perhaps God changed his mind on the matter?

a reply to: Akragon

Except Jesus said nothing of Grace... that was Paul that taught "grace

It's actually the theme beginning in Genesis. That faith is counted for righteousness. Abraham was justified when he believed God. The law wasn't meant to justify anyone, the Law was just given to condemn. And Jesus clearly made it known that any man who believed on Him would be saved. Think the thief on the cross.

And it was Paul who was sent to the Gentiles, I personally think because he was a Roman citizen and was educated in Greek. Peter was an illiterate fisherman. His only letter that he wrote himself is extremely rough Greek. Peter spent his ministry in Babylon, Iraq. At that time the greatest gathering of Jews outside of Jerusalem was in Babylon.