The majority thinks Christians are judgemental and stupid

reply to post by undo


*LGM hears undo scream eeeeek! LGM doesnt look up just runs with hands in the are screaming eeeeeeek!* lol

windword
reply to post by undo

 

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

How were Adam and Eve and the animals suppose to multiply and replenish the earth without physical sex?

The idea of carnal knowledge stemming from eating the fruit is only a theory, and certainly isn't backed by science.

well it goes back to reading the text and connecting the dots between events. for example, the biblical flood narrative, is actually 2 floods. one flood was bad but not global. during this flood, the noah figure was required to collect 7 clean animals in pairs (14), 7 birds (fowls) in pairs (14) and 2 unclean in pairs (4). that's a grand total of 32 animals and certainly not all the animals on the planet.

however, when genesis 1 opens, you see the creation of the universe, and then you jump to the earth being a state of chaos (tohu), covered in water, which the "spirit" of god is moving across. the water draws back to reveal dry land that's already there. later it says the earth was not created in a state of chaos, so genesis 1:2 and forward, is not about the original creation of the earth, but the earth after a global cataclysm in which the planet is in a state of tohu/chaos, covered in water. this is where i theorize, the dna of the life forms that were on the planet prior to the cataclysm, were collected/recorded/saved, and then RE-plenished the earth. to plenish means to fill. to replenish means to refill. these 2 flood events have since then, been melded into one flood event, in the text.

so when it says, go forth and replenish the earth, i do believe its talking about refilling it from the real global flood, which was not the flood we think of today as the black sea flood. the black sea flood was a bad flood, no doubt, but was not the global one.

Iamuniversalcreator
reply to post by Fraudfinder

 

Dont copy and paste stuff if you dont know what it means, parrots imitate, dont say the proof is in the book, because that book could have been written by anyone, anf you were not there to witness the,writing of the book, so when you post scriptures tell me what they mean to you, so I can see if you really are a follower of Jesus, or are you just one of the millions, that call on his name just to save their asses from a perceived hell...

I know exactly what it means. It is truly ashame that you don't.

reply to post by Fraudfinder

Reincarnation is a lie.

Resurrection is a lie.

reply to post by undo


Sorry, but I can't the book of Genesis literally.

windword
reply to post by Fraudfinder

 

Reincarnation is a lie.

Resurrection is a lie.

And there lies a part of the problem that you have.

You deny the resurrection of Jesus Christ, don't you?

windword
reply to post by undo

 

Sorry, but I can't the book of Genesis literally.

you just said my interpretation was incorrect because of the replenish part. so i explained the replenish part. there was a global cataclysm that required saving the lifeforms beforehand and then they were used to replenish the earth. later, the black sea flood was thought of to be the same as the original global cataclysm, but it was not. not only are these floods referenced in the bible, but in the texts of the sumerians, akkadians, and various other ancient cultures. are they all lying?

reply to post by Fraudfinder


Jesus "Christ" never existed, Jesus the Nazarene perhaps. But I do reject the mythology of the virgin birth, the miracles, the resurrection and the idea of a human blood sacrifice of a man/god, dying unto himself to save us from his wrath.

LoneGunMan
reply to post by ParasuvO

 

Like so many modern spiritualists you are separating the puzzle pieces. Think along the lines of combining the puzzle pieces of religion. The Hindu's wheel of Karma. Christians acknowledgement of sin and forgiveness of sin once you know you cannot help but to sin. Combine that with reincarnation and the wheel of Karma.

To me Karma is simply an idea that emanates from mans knowledge of good and evil. Nothing really spiritual at all. Reincarnation is just one solution, in mans blind condition, to the sin conclusion that the knowledge brings.

If you like to compare then compare the idea of a sacrifice, propitiation for man, against the idea of reincarnation and you will see the real and wide gulf between the idea of reincarnation and resurrection. One is salvation within man himself as he turns on the wheel while the other gives man zero hope on the wheel and salvation only in a propitiation of which there is none on the wheel.

In fact the only time a Wheel is mentioned or shown in the Hebrew view it was as a sign of judgment, of failure to keep the knowledge of even good and evil to a saving condition, the failure of a code based system given in a covenant with God to produce life. End game? When the wheel rolls around all we be found wanting.

windword
reply to post by Fraudfinder

 

Jesus "Christ" never existed, Jesus the Nazarene perhaps. But I do reject the mythology of the virgin birth, the miracles, the resurrection and the idea of a human blood sacrifice of a man/god, dying unto himself to save us from his wrath.

Jesus Christ (Christ meaning messiah) and Jesus of Nazareth are the same person.

If you do not know this it is because you have not studied or read the bible. This person is called the Christ in the bible.

Do you believe Jesus of Nazareth was resurrected?

ADDED LATER: No need to answer the question. I reread your above post and you explained yourself very clear. My apologies if I was pushy or forcing something on you.

reply to post by undo


Floods are natural and happen all the time, especially after the last ice age, and the glacier melts. The fact that there are stories and myths surrounding these events is no surprise. Some take the mythology seriously, I don't. But, when addressing the belief that these mythologies should dictate our worldly views and answer questions pertaining to our place in the universe, I think it's important to point out the inconsistencies with that actual myths and how they're being twisted to fit individual personal world views.

The mythological event of Adam and Eve eating the apple equating to the origin of human sexual reproduction clashes with the myth and with science.

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe


Sound to me as if some Christians are paranoid and/or have a persecution complex.

Perhaps it's "open season" on Christians because they are making themselves a target? And in some cases it even seems intentional, creating issues where there truly are none. Just my observation.

Judgemental? If forced to pick a side, I'd say that as a rule they seem to be, but then saying that would be being judgemental.

reply to post by LSU0408


Ignorance at its worst. That's all I have to say about this post.

windword
reply to post by Fraudfinder

 

Jesus "Christ" never existed, Jesus the Nazarene perhaps. But I do reject the mythology of the virgin birth, the miracles, the resurrection and the idea of a human blood sacrifice of a man/god, dying unto himself to save us from his wrath.

virgin birth=artificial insemination

miracles like resurrection from death = this one is obvious. people die and are brought back to life every day, with medicine.

human blood sacrifice = i have no idea why this was necessary to begin with (original animal sacrifice doesn't make sense in other words)

as far as the saving from his wrath part == 2 different gods there (actually 3). one is the accuser, the other is not. the accuser doesn't like human beings. he ordered our dna be downgraded because of our sin (sexual procreation). think of it like a heavenly court room. one is the prosecuting attorney, the other is the defense attorney. and the heavenly father is the judge in the court room.

the prosecuting attorney owned this planet, like a piece of real estate and didn't want humans multiplying on it and living forever. the defense attorney was a creator of life. he created human beings and has been defending his creation ever since.

once ya know what you're looking at, it becomes very evident.

reply to post by undo


Just remember that the accuser accuses according to Gods Law and is correct in doing so. The creator defends His creation with His own blood against the law which even He says is good.

reply to post by Fraudfinder

Jesus Christ (Christ meaning messiah) and Jesus of Nazareth are the same person.

No they're not.

Please re-read these posts of mine:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Logarock
reply to post by undo

 

Just remember that the accuser accuses according to Gods Law and is correct in doing so. The creator defends His creation with His own blood against the law which even He says is good.

yeah i know this but i think there's more to it, and especially where it involves blood.
that part makes no sense and the text doesn't do much to explain it either. other than perhaps his blood had some kind of other dimensional quality to it, and we inherit it other dimensionally, if you get my meaning

reply to post by undo

once ya know what you're looking at, it becomes very evident.

Seems to me we're looking at ancient aliens from this view, not God.

windword
reply to post by undo

 

once ya know what you're looking at, it becomes very evident.

Seems to me we're looking at ancient aliens from this view, not God.

i'm not looking at it, in the example, in any way other than to point out that these things can be defined with modern science, so strictly speaking, they aren't impossible. in fact, modern genetic science clarifies many things that were said to be impossible, 300 years ago (by catholic priests no less, who started the "enlightenment" by tossing out all ancient history lol)

Flipping the script and playing the "victim" card has worked well for many ethnic groups and religions over the course of history. For example, see how long it takes to be called a racist, bigot or anti-Semite if you disagree with the political (not even cultural!) policies of Israel.

I've known some great Christian people, but sadly I have to say I've run across some pretty horrible ones. I've been helped by Christians, and also left out in the cold by some.

I think the real problem here is that there's always going to be a few "bad apples" in every group of people. The hypocritical and judgmental members of the Christian community seem to stick out more than the rest; they usually have the loudest voices, and point their fingers away from themselves.

We always hear about "church scandals" -- yet we fail to realize those are the exception, not the norm.

I think for any group of like-minded people to have a positive reputation, they need to police themselves. Sadly, for ALL religions this seems to be an insurmountable task.