Is there really a god?

[a4a]

on the other hand if you are swimming along fine and a person keeps beaning you in the head with a life ring...........................

 

AT do you not understand that many of us do not believe what you believe. We do not want you to save us...... we are doing just great without you and your Idol. We are not worried about heaven or hell..... but we are worried that your beliefs will destroy our happiness because they are forced upon us in our daily living.

 

You can worship a Q-tip and believe that you will die and live in a holy tree fort...... I don't care. But just don't push your beliefs onto those that do not want it in their life. Nor take our choice away because that goes against your belief in the all mighty Q-tip.

 

a4a

[quankanne]

According to believers the rules do apply to us non believers...... so again from that point of view there is no true free will..... only the fact that you must believe or suffer. That is not really a choice of free will.

 

yes, there is free will involved, because you choose to not believe when you have the option to do just that or to believe. What *I* think is of no consequence because I cannot make that decision for you.

 

And if Heaven does exist, but you do not believe in the existence of heaven and hell, does not necessarily mean that a non-believer simply dies and goes to neither Heaven or Hell. Who is to say, which belief is the correct one, especially which set of rules apply to the non-believer?

 

each person has the choice to embrace or reject God. What I as a believer feel about the final destination of a person's soul has no bearing on what a non-believer thinks, because he understands (as it were) that he is not bound by any spiritual rules. It's all subjective.

 

regarding the comment about how "organized religion is of the devil" – my thought is that religion, organized or freely offered, is based in spirituality, and Satan will do his best to destroy the bond between God and man. Hence my thoughts on his trying to convince mankind that his soul holds no meaning and that you live for the physical now, not the eternity that comes with the soul.

[d'Arthez]

Evil is disobedience. People have to own up the the consequences of their actions, motivations and thoughts, and they will.

Ever wondered why Mr. Hitler himself was known to refer to Moses as the first communist? And if evil is disobedience, can we conclude that obeying evil is good?!? No wonder that some Christians are so conflicted, and apathic at times.

 

These are not ad hoc explanations.

Then why do you implicitly admit it, when you say "more reliable", and come up with the laughable idea that the two different genealogies are not for the same person? That a person can have even two names in the eyes of God. How would you concile the idea of free-will with the idea of foreknowledge of God. As that implies there is no free-will - it is a mere illusion at most then.

 

Just having a mental belief is not going to cut it on your death-bed, it has to be real.

And claiming you belief in God, does not get you in heaven. Far from it. Especially if you are the first to judge. And who is to say that it is not this what God desires? It is my game of making assumptions, and I make the assumption that this is what God requires. So far, I have the backing of the most important Christian mystic that lived.

 

Communism is dead. Atheism was the official doctrine of the Communist state, and look at how those people are oppressed. Christian Western States, that have allowed the Bible and Gospel to flourish, are generally properous places.

If you had bothered to read anything by Marx and Engels you would have seen they never even used the term communist state as you do. If you had read Marx and Engels, you would have known they were certainly not the critics of religion, people make them out to be. But if it is threatening your particular belief-system, hear-say suffices for an argument. Figures. You can't blame Marx and Engels if their pupils have interpreted them wrongly.

 

Well, many things require organization to function. Don't you brush your teeth in the morning or wake up at a certain time? Is that also of the devil?

Congratulations! You have proven able to miss the point completely. Early christianity did not have professional preachers / priests.

 

This arguement agrees that Christ rose from the dead. That being the case, everything Christ said is validated. He said, He is the ONLY way to the Father. To say otherwise would be to suggest the unthinkable.

Nonsense. If I make the rules, I decide what is unthinkable. And not you. A buddhist does not necessarily believe in God.

 

God is also predictablle, reliable, faithful, and acts based on His nature and character. Therefore, God is limited by who He is.

No. That is a false limitation. He created man. He created the world. He created death. He created evil. And I won't even hassle you with the many acts of "kindness" to argue about your description of God.

 

A rebellious prophet is an oxymoron, you can not be rebellious and a prophet at the same time.

Per definition you are rebellious when you are a prophet. You can hardly be content with blasphemy, polytheism in the Roman empire, et cetera. Do you think it is the task of a prophet to shut his mouth, just because he is in the minority?

 

The Spirit of God deals with unbelievers. If they despise the Spirit, then they are in trouble.

You are in trouble. For you are speaking for God. Now, shall we look at the verses that deal with your heinous crime?

 

The Bible says that man's heart, apart from Christ, is evil, nothing good and enduring can be expected from the human race apart from Christ.

That is interpretation. And as I make the assumptions, I say it is a false assumption. Great, is not this game?

 

Well, it is not the King James Version Bible, so it doesn't count.

It is the other way around KJV is not the Comedie Humaine. So the KJV does not count.

[a4a]

yes, there is free will involved, because you choose to not believe when you have the option to do just that or to believe. What *I* think is of no consequence because I cannot make that decision for you.

 

.

 

 

Ahhhhh........ regardless if I believe or not, believers attempt to make decisions for me...... such as abortion for example. Or my ability to buy a pair of socks on Sunday before 1 pm, or to buy beer....... you see how none believers lack free will and choice because of believers. But non believers are expected to be tolerant of ones choice to believe. So in many cases believers do make the decisions for non believers..... or at least make our freedom of choices more difficult in many cases.

 

a4a

[d'Arthez]

regarding the comment about how "organized religion is of the devil" – my thought is that religion, organized or freely offered, is based in spirituality, and Satan will do his best to destroy the bond between God and man. Hence my thoughts on his trying to convince mankind that his soul holds no meaning and that you live for the physical now, not the eternity that comes with the soul.

I understand your point Quank. And I certainly do not disagree as much as people might think. However, there are problems. For this is to assume that religion is not adversely affected by workings of bureaucracy, professional clergy, political power, et cetera. There are a lot of reasons to assume, that this assumption is not justified.

And of course the whole of political power, the whole professional clergy did not exist in Christ's time. So why should we add in elements to the teaching and the spirituality that did not exist at that time? And that includes concepts that have been applied much later to explain the events in the Bible, the concept of free will, et cetera.

 

Not every believing person lives for the eternity that comes with the soul - many, many choose to live for the physical now. And the same holds for non-believers. I simply do not see the advantage the addition of organization brings with it, other than from the perspective of control. But control of spirituality is a bad thing.

 

I must say, I am more attracted to mysticism.

[Moai]

Either God likes to mess with people and create agents to do just that, or He is not omniscient.

 

or he loves his creation enough to allow them to choose freely, but always hoping that they'll turn to him. Why would he want to mess with minds if he created us out of love?

 

Great question.

[Moai]

But, suppose I'm not here and am raptured away, then how am I going to see if you will honour your promise?

 

You'll have to have faith.

[Moai]

Well, maybe Joseph lived in a different place, or had to be numbered with some other people or relatives, that still does not preclude that, even if they did go door to door. People could jump to different homes and skew up the census.

 

That's why they do a census every ten years. ANd it wasn't just Joseph who had to travel, everyone did. That's why there was no room at the inn and the Fam had to stay in a manger.

 

Sure, you should listen to this guy teach the Bible.

 

I have. I watch his show whenever I can catch it. I think it is hilarious. He contradicts himself so regularly I am amazed anyone listens to him at all. And he is a charlatan and a liar. Do a Google search on him. You'll find out that in Seattle a woman had a heart attack at one of his shows and paramedics were delayed entry because their appearance wuold show Benny to be the sham he is. Or the poor family that bought his snake oil and took their kid off of medication as an act of faith AS DEMANDED BY HINN and the kid died. What is saddest is they blame themselves. NBC has done several excellent reports on him.

 

There is no financial benefit on his part by postulating that type of interpretation. Furthermore, as I said, a day to the Lord is as a thousand years to man, so technically, only two 'God-days' have passed, which may be a short time.

 

Oh yes there is. His interpretation is what makes his faith "healing" real. And believers send him tons of cash so he can build homes and fly in a private jet and dupe still more suckers. I would hope that the Holy Spirit, if it exists, would show you that Benny Hinn is evil.

 

These scholars never mentioned any specific 'dates' of anything. People like Peter and Paul Lalonde will never strictly make a date. But the facts are, Israel is a nation, and they have genetically resurrected the Red Heifer, to reinsitute sacrifices, another indication of end-time Bible prophecy.

 

Hal Lindsay did. Read "The Late Great Planet Earth." Also, they don't give a specific date, but they certainly believe "any second now" which has been going on since the 1800's. Still no sign of him.

 

Watch it, or you may be in contempt of court. According to the Bible, you will be judged for everything that you have done, and will bow before the Lord Jesus and will declare Him as Lord, no matter what you do or think.

 

I would go with my head held high. And by virtue of the fact that I can recognize the charlatans that you put some of your faith in, it is YOU who should tremble. If there is a Satan, you are being duped by him.

 

The point is, you can not conclusively show any contradictions in the Bible.

Instead of coming out with a logically valid rebuff, this is the best you can do is cry sour grapes? Sounds like you dont have any case.

 

I know you won't, but go to the Skeptic's Annotated Bible and read them for yourself. It's funny, but I saw a website that supposedly refutes the Skeptic's site, but you have to pay for their version. WHy charge for religious truth? The Skeptic's site is completely free, by the way.

 

Again, you are crying sour grapes. I have come up with explanations fair and square. You only cry sour grapes when you run out of fuel.

 

Just because an explanation fits doesn't mean it is valid. You have given ad hoc explanations and assumptions, but they don't hold up under scrutiny. I don't blame you, as your primary source material is so weak. It seems that you worship the Bible itself more than the God it attempts to explain.

[quankanne]

Ahhhhh........ regardless if I believe or not, believers attempt to make decisions for me...... such as abortion for example. Or my ability to buy a pair of socks on Sunday before 1 pm, or to buy beer....... you see how none believers lack free will and choice because of believers. But non believers are expected to be tolerant of ones choice to believe. So in many cases believers do make the decisions for non believers..... or at least make our freedom of choices more difficult in many cases.

 

then you've got to get yourself to Texas, honey, because you can buy socks any day of the week, any hour of the day, provided you're not anti-WalMart; they also sell beer on Sundays in those counties that voted to go wet!

 

as for abortion, doesn't Roe V. Wade provide for that act legally? If you support it, well hey, no one is forcing a decision saying you cannot find it legally in this country. An objector forced to recognize its legality even though it's morally wrong.

 

my thought is that if one is secure in his or her belief/non-belief, it's not going to matter one iota what the opposing camp says or does because he/she understands the stance chosen. My evangelizing on this board doesn't lessen your freedom to choose not to believe any more than your disbelief messes with my freedom to believe.

 

However, there are problems. For this is to assume that religion is not adversely affected by workings of bureaucracy, professional clergy, political power, et cetera. There are a lot of reasons to assume, that this assumption is not justified. And of course the whole of political power, the whole professional clergy did not exist in Christ's time. So why should we add in elements to the teaching and the spirituality that did not exist at that time?

 

my personal theory? man cannot exist as if in a vacuum, without some form of structure or order, even when it comes to something as personal as religion. There's a natural inclination to order, rather than toward chaos. Practically speaking, the Church (Catholic) spread far and wide and it prolly just made sense to create a hierarchy to ensure that the faith was propogated properly, and not a bunch of loose cannons running willy nilly, teaching their "take" on the Truth as discerned from the Bible. You cannot run a large business without a hierarchical structure and expect it to be successful; same goes with religion, especially a religion that is to propogate the faith throughout the ages.

 

I simply do not see the advantage the addition of organization brings with it, other than from the perspective of control. But control of spirituality is a bad thing.

 

really? That's an interesting line of thought, because as a cradle Catholic, I've found it to be encouraging that my Church has stood for the same things lo these many centuries, and that it's not going to change at the blink of an eye. I don't feel controlled in any sense, but rather a sense of freedom because those things which are sinful (or, break that union between me and God) are spelled out, are defined. It's easier to navigate around sin because I'm not picking and choosing what it okay. In a recent interview, a woman I was speaking with was describing natural family planning and the mindset against it because of the prevailing thought that artificial birth control was the only "proper way" to avoid pregnancy. She'd pointed out that until the 1930s, no Christian church in this country advocated artificial birth control. Today, it's only the Catholic Church that stands firm in its belief that it's not a good thing, nor is abortion, which sprung from the birth control issue. Protestant religions as a whole don't stand for or against moral issues, which I think would make it harder to see sin for what it is because there's no direction from the top, so to speak. Do I? Or don't I? It doesn't matter because I'm making the judgment call and am answerable only to myself ~ God doesn't have to be in the equation. My spirituality isn't being controlled but rather, defined more sharply, in my opinion: there is right, and there is wrong, period.

[Admiral Thrawn]

That's why they do a census every ten years. ANd it wasn't just Joseph who had to travel, everyone did. That's why there was no room at the inn and the Fam had to stay in a manger.

 

So, now you are saying that everyone had to travel. Guess that resolves the issue of the census then.

 

I have. I watch his show whenever I can catch it. I think it is hilarious. He contradicts himself so regularly I am amazed anyone listens to him at all. And he is a charlatan and a liar. Do a Google search on him. You'll find out that in Seattle a woman had a heart attack at one of his shows and paramedics were delayed entry because their appearance wuold show Benny to be the sham he is. Or the poor family that bought his snake oil and took their kid off of medication as an act of faith AS DEMANDED BY HINN and the kid died. What is saddest is they blame themselves. NBC has done several excellent reports on him.

 

Oh yes there is. His interpretation is what makes his faith "healing" real. And believers send him tons of cash so he can build homes and fly in a private jet and dupe still more suckers. I would hope that the Holy Spirit, if it exists, would show you that Benny Hinn is evil.

 

I never said Benny Hinn was perfect. My honest opinion of him is he is mixing things. The origins of his ministry are very shakey. I have also viewed the same news reports about this guy of how he rents the most expensive hotels in Italy and makes thousand dollar tips (while giving a homeless woman nearby $ 20.00). You think I am going to make a financial contribution to this guy's ministry?

 

However, that being said, I like his choir. The way they sing in his regular church is so heavenly annointed. The way he teaches from the Bible is also very interesting. I'm talking about the 1993-1995 Benny Hinn church, I do not know about now. I can not completely dismiss this ministry as inauthentic, but on the other hand, I am also aware that this guy is not perfect either.

 

Same thing with Jimmy Swaggart. So what if he went with a prostitute before - heck, any guy is tempted with lust, including the best of us. I've read all his Bible Commentaries, and think this guy makes allot of sence. Each person in Ministry, has both their good and bad points, I tend to focus on what I can learn from them instead of criticing them.

 

I look at the Old Testament account of Samson. Another annointed person that went with a whore. Or Judah, he also went with a whore, (or someone who pretended to be a whore) and the line of the Messiah went through it.

Fact is, you cant completely dismiss someone's ministry because of a few bad things that may have happened. We are living in the REAL WORLD, and dealing with REAL PEOPLE, not a perfect world and perfect people.

 

 

Hal Lindsay did. Read "The Late Great Planet Earth." Also, they don't give a specific date, but they certainly believe "any second now" which has been going on since the 1800's. Still no sign of him.

 

I have not read "The Late Greate Planet Earth". Well, I think that Peter and Paul Lalonde, and Grant Jeffery can stand up to scrutiny with their prophetical ascertations, and they are scholars about the subject.

 

I would go with my head held high. And by virtue of the fact that I can recognize the charlatans that you put some of your faith in, it is YOU who should tremble. If there is a Satan, you are being duped by him.

 

But that is where you are wrong. ON a Judgement Day, God is looking at you, not your opinions of other people you are looking down on. In fact, looking down on people is a sin in itself anyway.

 

I know you won't, but go to the Skeptic's Annotated Bible and read them for yourself.

 

You know me well.

 

Just because an explanation fits doesn't mean it is valid.

 

Whatever.

[converse02]

Rapture, hell, baseless claims. There's no physical proof of unicorns, fairies, or Santa Claus, shall I believe in those too? Life would become unlivable for me. How do people like you get jobs if you believe in all this nonsense?

 

I think if you were as strong in your convictions of unbelief, you'd have adopted a "live and let live" attitude toward these posts by believers. Instead, I get the feeling you're threatened by what you don't possess or understand, so you deal potshots like "How do people like you get jobs …." (The "duh" answer is that we land jobs based on qualifications, just like everyone else )

 

whether you believe in God or not, you enjoy the same freedom to choose your beliefs as everyone else. Get over yourself, dude.

Dude, it's an honest point of view. Excuse me.

 

If a person walks around believing is fantastic stories without proof, and accepting nonsense like a the creator of the universe using an engaged virgin in Palestine to give birth to Himself who later gets executed by Romans, how DO they get jobs as it appears they lack basic reasoning skills? I don't understand, excuse me. Perhaps they compartmentalize, ignore the obvious, have blind faith, choose or doublethink, whatever. How do you separate what myths to have faith in and what not to?

 

Imagine if you were on the outside looking in, at someone like yourself. You meet another person who says a book written in the bronze age which is flatly wrong when it comes to the Earth being created in six days, talking snakes, and Noah fitting a zoo in a boat, but 100% right on fuzzy moral issues like abortion, gays, and divorce. Wouldn't it be natural for an outsider to feel a little freaked and think it's crazy, to feel a little "threatened by what you don't possess or understand." Excuse me! Dude, your the one who needs to get over himself.

[Admiral Thrawn]

Ever wondered why Mr. Hitler himself was known to refer to Moses as the first communist? And if evil is disobedience' date=' can we conclude that obeying evil is good?!? [/quote']

 

Let's just say, you are either obeying God, or you are obeying the devil.

If you obey God, you are disobeying the devil and vice-versa.

Therefore, the obedience I am referring to is obeying God.

 

Then why do you implicitly admit it, when you say "more reliable", and come up with the laughable idea that the two different genealogies are not for the same person?

 

I guess it is laughable that your grandparents on your mother's side, may be different from the grandparents on your father's side too?

 

That a person can have even two names in the eyes of God.

 

You have a problem with that?

 

How would you concile the idea of free-will with the idea of foreknowledge of God. As that implies there is no free-will - it is a mere illusion at most then.

 

No, foreknowledge is just foreknowledge. We have past knowledge and present knowledge. Nobody knows the winning lottery numbers.

 

Foreknowledge just pusts God as a spectator of future events, but does not mean that He is imposing on people's free wills, just like you viewing a sport's game on TV, wont make a difference on who is winning or losing, right?

 

And claiming you belief in God, does not get you in heaven. Far from it. Especially if you are the first to judge. And who is to say that it is not this what God desires? It is my game of making assumptions, and I make the assumption that this is what God requires. So far, I have the backing of the most important Christian mystic that lived.

 

You can have whatever backing you like, but I'll stick with the Bible. I only deal with the sure thing.

 

Congratulations! You have proven able to miss the point completely. Early christianity did not have professional preachers / priests.

 

They had Apostles and people in authority, such as Elders. It was not a state of anarchy and every man for himself either.

 

Nonsense. If I make the rules, I decide what is unthinkable. And not you. A buddhist does not necessarily believe in God.

 

But you dont make the rules, God does. Anyone who doesn't believe in God is foolish. I dont care what fools believe.

 

No. That is a false limitation. He created man. He created the world. He created death. He created evil. And I won't even hassle you with the many acts of "kindness" to argue about your description of God.

 

You forgot free-will.

 

Per definition you are rebellious when you are a prophet. You can hardly be content with blasphemy, polytheism in the Roman empire, et cetera. Do you think it is the task of a prophet to shut his mouth, just because he is in the minority?

 

Rebellious refers to being against God, not against man. Or, a false prophet, was what I thought you were referring to.

 

You are in trouble. For you are speaking for God. Now, shall we look at the verses that deal with your heinous crime?

 

No I dont speak for God, the Bible speaks for God.

[Admiral Thrawn]

on the other hand if you are swimming along fine and a person keeps beaning you in the head with a life ring...........................

 

AT do you not understand that many of us do not believe what you believe. We do not want you to save us...... we are doing just great without you and your Idol. We are not worried about heaven or hell..... but we are worried that your beliefs will destroy our happiness because they are forced upon us in our daily living.

 

a4a

 

No, you are in a state of denial and state of delusion. You need God in your life. You need to eat of the bread of life, and drink of the blood of everlasting life.

[Moai]

So, now you are saying that everyone had to travel. Guess that resolves the issue of the census then.

 

This is disingenuous of you. You suggested it was perhaps just Joseph who had to travel, while the fable says everyone did. That would make the census irrelevant and stupid. That is the point, and yet again you didn't address it. I dealt with your lame comparison to voting, and you chose to ignore the gist of the thread in the hopes of scroing a cheap point--which you didn't. Again I don't blame you, really, as your position is untenable but you must do what you can.

 

I never said Benny Hinn was perfect. My honest opinion of him is he is mixing things. The origins of his ministry are very shakey. I have also viewed the same news reports about this guy of how he rents the most expensive hotels in Italy and makes thousand dollar tips (while giving a homeless woman nearby $ 20.00). You think I am going to make a financial contribution to this guy's ministry?

 

There is a difference between being less than perfect (which we all are) to being an evil liar who preys on the weak. I am glad to hear that you don't give him money, but you did mention that you agree with his biblical interpretations. You would think that a man who is in touch with the Holy Spirit--which you must be in order to interpret the Bible correctly, no?--would not be able to dupe old, sick, or depressed people out of their money.

 

However, that being said, I like his choir. The way they sing in his regular church is so heavenly annointed. The way he teaches from the Bible is also very interesting. I'm talking about the 1993-1995 Benny Hinn church, I do not know about now. I can not completely dismiss this ministry as inauthentic, but on the other hand, I am also aware that this guy is not perfect either.

 

The Bible says good fruit cannot come from a bad tree, doesn't it? And even if Hinn were a good guy at one point (he never was), he isn't now, so using the terms of your mythos Satan has clearly gotten to him.

 

Same thing with Jimmy Swaggart. So what if he went with a prostitute before - heck, any guy is tempted with lust, including the best of us. I've read all his Bible Commentaries, and think this guy makes allot of sence. Each person in Ministry, has both their good and bad points, I tend to focus on what I can learn from them instead of criticing them.

 

There is a big difference between being less than perfect and being a lying hypocrite. Swaggart is an unrepentant hypocritical lying douchebag. That's why, after his first tear-filled apology to his flock, he went out and did it AGAIN. Surely Jesus and/or the Holy Spirit would help him deal with his problems with lust? I am not a spiritual person, and I can avoid seeing prositutes--even though it is legal here, where for him it was a crime. I'm not married, either, and he is. Why would God choose such people to represent Him? The fact is, God has nothing to do with it. It is all about money from those who are terrified of the Hell/Satan myth. Where do you think Swaggart got the money for the hookers from? It was moeny given to him in the name of Jesus. Does it make sense to you that God would tolerate that--given His response to others who have committed lesser offenses and given harsher treatment as described in the Bible? God does nothing because He is not here to do anything, as there isn't one.

 

I look at the Old Testament account of Samson. Another annointed person that went with a whore. Or Judah, he also went with a whore, (or someone who pretended to be a whore) and the line of the Messiah went through it.

Fact is, you cant completely dismiss someone's ministry because of a few bad things that may have happened. We are living in the REAL WORLD, and dealing with REAL PEOPLE, not a perfect world and perfect people.

 

Sure I can. Good fruit cannoot come from a bad tree, remember? Beyond going on television what do any of these ministries actually do? None of the people you mentioned from the Old Testement had television ministries that duped millions of people out of millions of dollars for their own gain, and were hypocritical about it. The Old Testement has many stories of people being less than righteous--including God himself--but that does not absolve any of these modern liars for what they are doing to people.

 

I have not read "The Late Greate Planet Earth". Well, I think that Peter and Paul Lalonde, and Grant Jeffery can stand up to scrutiny with their prophetical ascertations, and they are scholars about the subject.

 

No, they aren't--at least not serious ones. I am not aware of any major university on the globe that uses books they write, or agrees with their interpretations of events.

 

But that is where you are wrong. ON a Judgement Day, God is looking at you, not your opinions of other people you are looking down on. In fact, looking down on people is a sin in itself anyway.

 

THere are certainly people I look down on. I don't care if it is a sin or not (aas I don't even agree with that as a concept), but I do think that Hinn, Swaggart et al are scum and if I could I would throw them in prison like they deserve. Beyond them though, I think most Christians--even Fundamentalists--are well-meaning people that aren't any worse or better than I am. I look down on their beliefs, not on them.

 

You know me well.

 

If your faith is so shaky that it can't even stand looking at quotes from your very own book and can't help you explain them, what good is it?

 

Whatever.

 

All the land on Earth being the back of a great sea turtle explains perfectly well why the land itself is here, but tat doesn't make it true. "HUmours" explain disese perfectly well, but that doesn't make them real. Saying that the two geneologies are for two different people explains the contradiction, but that doesn't make it right or even rational.

[Admiral Thrawn]

This is disingenuous of you. You suggested it was perhaps just Joseph who had to travel, while the fable says everyone did. That would make the census irrelevant and stupid. That is the point, and yet again you didn't address it. I dealt with your lame comparison to voting, and you chose to ignore the gist of the thread in the hopes of scroing a cheap point--which you didn't. Again I don't blame you, really, as your position is untenable but you must do what you can.

 

What are you trying to say? You believe they took the census or not?

 

There is a difference between being less than perfect (which we all are) to being an evil liar who preys on the weak. I am glad to hear that you don't give him money, but you did mention that you agree with his biblical interpretations. You would think that a man who is in touch with the Holy Spirit--which you must be in order to interpret the Bible correctly, no?--would not be able to dupe old, sick, or depressed people out of their money.

 

There is a principle of 'annointed one' in the Bible. If someone is 'annointed' for a specific Ministry, even if they apostasice, or act in a way that is contrary to that 'annointing' does not influence their status.

 

The theological proof of that is the conflict between David and Saul in the Bible. Even though at one point, Saul became a renegade, David still respected his 'annointing' from God, and did not kill him when he had opportunity to.

 

I believe that a person who is annointed with God, can fall into sin, as anyone can, and they will be judged accordingly by God, but they may still exhibit gifts from the Spirit. That is why the Bible says, that even though someone may have done many good works for the Kingdom of Christ, does not necessarily mean they will make it if they are fundamentally putting on a show and are not real.

 

There is a big difference between being less than perfect and being a lying hypocrite. Swaggart is an unrepentant hypocritical lying douchebag. That's why, after his first tear-filled apology to his flock, he went out and did it AGAIN. Surely Jesus and/or the Holy Spirit would help him deal with his problems with lust?

 

There is no problems of this nature from this Evangelist to date, it appears he has been victorious with this past problem and serves as a great example to people who are struggling with sin, that any sin can be overcome by the grace of God.

 

It is perfectly normal for Christians to be struggling with sin, as long as they overcome it at the end of the day (by trusting in God and not their own will-power). Unlike humans, God always forgives sin.

 

 

I am not a spiritual person, and I can avoid seeing prositutes--even though it is legal here, where for him it was a crime. I'm not married, either, and he is.

 

Everyone has a sin-problem, yours may not be lust, maybe it is doubt.

 

Why would God choose such people to represent Him?

 

Because He is God. Why did Jesus choose fishermen to be His disciples?

 

The fact is, God has nothing to do with it. It is all about money from those who are terrified of the Hell/Satan myth.

 

You only know the 'media''s truth, but even you know, sometimes the media dont tell the whole truth. Look at the Gulf war, you think the media is giving a fair unbiased representatoin? You think it is fair with Jimmy Swaggart? Of course not. Guess who owns the media?

 

Where do you think Swaggart got the money for the hookers from? It was moeny given to him in the name of Jesus.

 

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. What Jimmy Swaggart did is between God and himself.

 

Does it make sense to you that God would tolerate that--given His response to others who have committed lesser offenses and given harsher treatment as described in the Bible?

 

God forgives sin. That is why Jesus came to earth, He came to die for our sins. That is what it is all about. You are talking about a sin of passion here, not lying or Blaspheming the Holy Spirit.

 

God does nothing because He is not here to do anything, as there isn't one.

 

Or because God forgives and forgets.

 

Sure I can. Good fruit cannoot come from a bad tree, remember? Beyond going on television what do any of these ministries actually do?

 

Go to the Ministry web-site and ask them. I'm sure they will say they are doing lots of things that are charitable, and evangelising the world. They are using the money to save and help people.

 

None of the people you mentioned from the Old Testement had television ministries that duped millions of people out of millions of dollars for their own gain, and were hypocritical about it.

 

The point I'm making is about being less than perfect. The Bible does not teach sinless perfection.

 

Saying that the two geneologies are for two different people explains the contradiction, but that doesn't make it right or even rational.

 

Why not? Don't you have two different geneologies from both your parents?

[Toni_no12002]

really it is a kind of bribary.Either you believe in god or burn in hell.Maybe gods saying right well you dont want to follow me then ill punish you.I thought he was above all that childish stuff.

 

Who was it who said when all sin was gone from the world they will bring back the tree?Well sin is still there as the tree will be there to try and make us eat from it.Why put temptation there when god knows what where like after all he made us!

 

Can i ask why do believers believe in god?Because they want to go to heaven.Simple as.

 

If a god said follow me and do everything i say the way i say it but still you will go to hell then i doubt anyone will follow him.

 

Ive read things on psychology and humans do things to suit themselves most of the time.In order to get a reward.Like going to heaven.

 

I give blood.Some people may say thats a nice thing to do but if i really think about it i do it because im helping other people so it makes me feel better about myself.Maybe its the same sort of thing with god.So why do people say that non believers dont want to believe but they still want the rewards of going to heaven?Where all human and its a proven fact humans do things to gain things for ourselfs.If you think about it, it is true!

[d'Arthez]

Admiral,

 

Free will does not exist, if there is an omniscient creator. For he knows beforehand what we will do. If I were to become a murderer, God already knows. And there is nothing anyone can do about it. We are mere puppets then. If I were to win the Nobel Prize, there is nothing anyone can do about it. Sure, you can kill me now - so that I don't win the Nobel Prize. However, God would know beforehand that I do not win the Nobel Prize, because I got killed. Or would you limit God's foreknowledge? That is a limitation you put on God.

 

God already knows what we are going to do, if God has foreknowledge. Whether we go to heaven or hell. Whether or not we will live in the year 2007. Whether we will become fathers and mothers. Sinners and lovers.

 

You simply attribute free will to humans, because you do not understand God. Or is it because the whole concept of free will is first and foremost a political one? Shocking as it may sound, but it took a while for theologicans and philosophers to come up with the concept of free will. And even more shocking that went exactly against the whole idea of foreknowledge. You can't have both. You can have only one of the two to be true.

 

Morality becomes already a dubious concept with Divine foreknowledge. We are under the illusion that we behave according rule x, or y. Yet God knows beforehand whether or not that will happen. Forced morality is not morality at all. Just as you cannot attribute intelligence to the programmatic works of ants.

 

As for rejecting Eckhart, guess what his views were based on? As for certainty, that is a moot point in religious matters. I can proclaim that Eckhart is correct. And am certain of it: as Eckhart shows us what God wills. At least one of us is lying then.

 

Certainty is the work of the devil, in many Christian traditions (remember what lovely Calvin proclaimed?) And the assumption that all others but our own group is lying is easy to make. The only problem is, is that about 30,000 Christian groups make the same assumption. And have no problem to send every disbeliever to hell. And citing scripture will not do to prove who is right and who is wrong, as every group can do that.

 

In this game of creating ad hoc assumptions, I can make similar rules for the people with some specific mindsets in all religious and social persuasions in existence. And receive a lot of backing from that, even from the KJV.

 

As for having to names in the eye of God, that is blasphemous. If God is omniscient, one name must suffice. So far, the explanation expounded by Moai makes more sense on the matter than yours. But of course, every explanation you draw from the KJV must be unmistakenably correct. Yet, I can do the same with my "Bible" - now shall we really start on that subject?

 

And again, if you may make ad hoc explanations, I certainly may also. So show me the proof from my Bible (which rejects yours, so I won't accept any "proof" from that) that William Blake is not a prophet.

 

Oh and I suggest you bring your Bible to the market. A speaking Bible, that is indeed a valuable asset. You come up with your own prejudices, stereotypes and expectations of the truth, read the Bible, but with the intent to confirm said prejudices, stereotypes and expectations of the truth. Wow - a perfect exercise in futility.

[d'Arthez]

really it is a kind of bribary.Either you believe in god or burn in hell.Maybe gods saying right well you dont want to follow me then ill punish you.I thought he was above all that childish stuff.

Some Christian groups are like that. But not all. Christianity even had the concept of the unknowing believer, which refered to non-christians, but who acted in accordance (sometimes even without the knowledge of christian doctrine) with the doctrine.

 

Can i ask why do believers believe in god?Because they want to go to heaven.Simple as.

It is more complex than that. You must not forget, that religion is also a way of making sense of the world.

 

I give blood.Some people may say thats a nice thing to do but if i really think about it i do it because im helping other people so it makes me feel better about myself.

You give blood? Whether or not you believe, that is always a good thing. For you help your fellow (wo)man. Those are the things that count. Doing good - helping others. And the funny thing is, by doing these things we are feeling better, feel powerful because we can make such significant contributions to the lives of other people. These are the things that count. For all of us.

[HotCaliGirl]

It is more complex than that. You must not forget' date=' that religion is also a way of making sense of the world.[/quote']

It is also used to keep order in the world. If I had evidence to prove God didn't exist, it wouldn't be a good idea to disclose it otherwise people would "sin" like crazy having an excuse to no longer follow religious doctrines.

 

They would no longer fear of not living in an afterlife in heaven based on their actions or of getting scared that they would come back as something bad, whatever it is their religion tells/scares them into thinking to keep them in check and minimize chaos in the world.

[Admiral Thrawn]

really it is a kind of bribary.Either you believe in god or burn in hell.Maybe gods saying right well you dont want to follow me then ill punish you.I thought he was above all that childish stuff.

 

Bribary is defined as paying money as an official in exchange of getting a favour, for example a judge, to pervert justice. Obviously you are not sure what you are talking about. You do not buy things from God, - that is why the 'do good deeds to earn salvation' doctrine that the 'world religions' believe doesn't work, because even good-deeds cant buy anything with God. God gives away gifts. Salvation is a gift that is given away. Anybody, rich or poor can have faith. Only rich people can bribe. So, this is universal. There is no perversion of justice, because Jesus' suffering and death on the cross was because of your sin. Jesus was judged for your sin. However, if you reject or negelect Christ, than that would be in vain for you, as you would then be judged for your sin. The fact that sin has to be judged period, whether it is on you, or on Christ, is not bribary, that is justice.

 

Who was it who said when all sin was gone from the world they will bring back the tree?Well sin is still there as the tree will be there to try and make us eat from it.Why put temptation there when god knows what where like after all he made us!

 

This is the tree of life - immortality. The 'fountain of youth'.

In literature, people are always looking for a 'fountain of youth' that if they take a pill, or drink some water, they will be young again and live forever. Same concept.

 

Revelation 22:14 "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in throught the gates of the city".

 

Can i ask why do believers believe in god?Because they want to go to heaven.Simple as.

 

Because it works. There is nothing in this world that is going to satisfy anyone. You are in a constant state of restless if you are living to fill yourself with all the world has to offer. In other words, there is no better option, other than to believe in God based on what is available with all the corruption, falseness and failure that is around.

 

If a god said follow me and do everything i say the way i say it but still you will go to hell then i doubt anyone will follow him.

 

Is that what you believe God says? That is not what my God is saying.

My God says that He loves the world so much that He gave His Son, so you can just believe on Him for eternal life, without worrying about being 'good enough' to make it. That is the point. If you are only following commandments and trying to be 'good enough to make it', then that is not the Gospel - that is heresy.

 

Ive read things on psychology and humans do things to suit themselves most of the time.In order to get a reward.Like going to heaven.

 

That is not what the Bible says. Again, nobody is good enough to make it, except Jesus Christ. Since Jesus died for our sins, by believing in Him, we can all make it.

[Admiral Thrawn]

Admiral,

 

Free will does not exist, if there is an omniscient creator. For he knows beforehand what we will do. If I were to become a murderer, God already knows. And there is nothing anyone can do about it. We are mere puppets then. If I were to win the Nobel Prize, there is nothing anyone can do about it. Sure, you can kill me now - so that I don't win the Nobel Prize. However, God would know beforehand that I do not win the Nobel Prize, because I got killed. Or would you limit God's foreknowledge? That is a limitation you put on God.

 

God already knows what we are going to do, if God has foreknowledge. Whether we go to heaven or hell. Whether or not we will live in the year 2007. Whether we will become fathers and mothers. Sinners and lovers.

 

Knowledge about the future does not mean you are manipulating future events, any more than knowledge about the past would mean manipulation of past events. God is a spectator of the future events in your life, you are in charge of making the decisions in your life that will result in whatever consequences you have to face in the future. So, you have free-will.

 

If we didn't have free-will then we would be making perfect decisions all the time, wouldn't we?

 

 

You simply attribute free will to humans, because you do not understand God. Or is it because the whole concept of free will is first and foremost a political one? Shocking as it may sound, but it took a while for theologicans and philosophers to come up with the concept of free will. And even more shocking that went exactly against the whole idea of foreknowledge. You can't have both. You can have only one of the two to be true.

 

I believe I have explained this point enough, and think this must be the third or fourth post that I'm replying to, and saying the same thing. Knowledge about a future, present or past event, to a passive spectator, does not influence what is going on. God is not like a corrupt human being. Sure, if any human knew what all the winning lottery numbers were, they would always buy the winning ticket, or at least a few times, I know at least I would. God does not operate like that. (And He will not answer any prayers about future lottery numbers - there would be allot of false believers if He did that).

 

For example, even though certain things have happened in God's foreknowledge, many of these things, He does not want to happen. God did not want Adam and Eve to eat the fruit, nor does He want anyone to go to hell. However, because He respects free-will, even if the foreknowledge is against His interest and purpose, He is not going to change it so that it will fit. So free-will is guaranteed.

 

Why exactly do you believe knowledge about a future event is contrary to free will? You are just asserting a view point, without providing any evidence or rational arguement to back up what you are saying.

 

 

As for having to names in the eye of God, that is blasphemous. If God is omniscient, one name must suffice. So far, the explanation expounded by Moai makes more sense on the matter than yours. But of course, every explanation you draw from the KJV must be unmistakenably correct. Yet, I can do the same with my "Bible" - now shall we really start on that subject?

 

Then you dont believe that God changed Abram's name to Abraham, or Jacob's name to Israel? Again, two name references.

 

I could just as well say your assertions that God cant refer to one person by two names or more references is blasphemous because you are limiting God. If humans can handle nick names, other names, first, middle, last names, you are saying God cant do that - and you are calling my assertions blasphemous?

 

You have raised interesting points of discussion about free-will, and about names, however, the rest of your post just sounds like a bashing contest. I honestly do not understand why you are going to post something that will not score any points of consideration with me, unless you just want to preach to the converted.

[wizdom]

MOAI you know it is possible to have two different genealogies. My mother and father cerntanly arent related so that would make two different generations right? so what makes that any different for Jesus Christ. It doesn't. your argument is those void:D

 

second David was a man after God's own heart and he was highly favored by God, and you know what he had a sexual addiction. He constantly fell into sin as we all do but he repented and turned away and ran after God with everything he had.

 

Alot of your arguments make sense in a rational scientific mindset that the world has told you it is okay, and some of your arguments are just plain old garbage. there is a big difference between a believer and an un-believer. as a beliver i have been justified through the shedding of Christ Blood and since i have accepted his free gift there is now no more condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus. That does not mean i will never sin or fall in to temptation but as I repent and turn completly away my sins our covered and hid in the blood of Christ and God remembers them no more. It is only us that remembers the sin and continues to dwell on it and that's why sometimes we feel guilty for things in our past. also I as a believer see things eternally b/c we are but a vapor here today and gone tomorrow. Even if i lived 100 years on this earth that is nothing compared to enternity. you can't even imagine what eternity is. Think about in moses time people lived for thousands of years how do you explain that or do you say it is made up. If you look at the generations as each generation passed they began to die younger and younger b/c the world kept becoming more corrupt until now we die at a mere 90 years which is not even nothing compared to 900 years let alone eternity. So we were made to live forever and our souls will but since adam and eve disobeyed God and our souls died we have to die a physical death but our spirit will live on. That is why it is important to except the free gift off salvation so that your soul can live in peace forever and not be separated from God.

 

I have a couple things to say about if there is isn't hell. Think about a volcano if you will for a moment what is it made of? How far does it extend? I believe that Hell is in the center of the earth that;s why the earth gets hotter as you go toward the center of the earth. Now people in the Bible days did not know that hell was in the center of the earth yet they wrote that there would be fire and brimestone, and sulpher, and what is in the earth as you travel down we have disscoverd through machines that we invented that there is sulpher,brimestone etc as you go deeper into the earths service.That can't possible be a educated guess as you so clearly stated they were not an educated people. so how would they get that revelation could if be a that it was God inspired. I think so.

 

you guys really make me laugh and honestly it is ashame that your hearts are so hardend to actual accepted Christ. God gives us free will to choose yes he knows what we are going to choose but you can still choose to do right. There are many paths you can take in this life it is up to you to walk the straight and narrow. There are many ways that lead to hell and only way to heaven rether you believe it oh not does not make it any less true.

 

question for those who doubt God's existence. How do you explain a woman being heald from a peach size tumor in her eye. she went to church and was prayed for her tumor to dry up and when she went to the doctor they could not find one trace of cancer or even the tumor. How do you explain it? That's enough proof for me to say that there is a GOd. she stills has pictures of the tumor where did it go. Did it evolve away. i think not:laugh:

[Admiral Thrawn]

Well said brother Wizdom! This guy knows that he is talking about.

[d'Arthez]

Knowledge about the future does not mean you are manipulating future events, any more than knowledge about the past would mean manipulation of past events.

True.

 

God is a spectator of the future events in your life, you are in charge of making the decisions in your life that will result in whatever consequences you have to face in the future. So, you have free-will.

False. I do not have free will. Simply because God already knows what I will. If he would not know what I will, he would not have foreknowledge of what I will. If he does know what I will, I cannot will freely.

 

If we didn't have free-will then we would be making perfect decisions all the time, wouldn't we?

False. Free will or lack of free will does not say anything about the quality of "decisions" we make.

 

The whole concept of decision is a dubious one, if you attribute foreknowledge to God. How can you decide on something, when that "decision" is the only one you can make? You don't make a decision. You do not choose doing x over doing y. It was already predetermined (God works in mysterious ways). If it were otherwhise, God's foreknowledge has proven fallible. That cannot be, therefore there cannot be a decision.

The whole concept of free will is a fallacy.

 

I believe I have explained this point enough, and think this must be the third or fourth post that I'm replying to, and saying the same thing. Knowledge about a future, present or past event, to a passive spectator, does not influence what is going on.

No. But it already implies that what is going on is predetermined. If I were to fill a bowl with water, by putting it under the tap, I will know even if I leave the room that the water will remain running. And if I don't return, and the water flows over the edges of the bowl, so be it. But it does not imply that because it would be a waste of water or what not that the tap automatically closes itself down, because so is as I willed. That would be attributing (my) purpose to the tap, which is laughable at best.

Now, if God knows whether or not I am going to return to the tap, to close it down (or not) it does not alter the fact that he knows beforehand whether or not I will return in time to close the tap. I may be under a lot of illusions with regards to the question whether or not I will return to the tap - but not to the point that I can change the future as God knows it. Therefore, I may have the illusion of free will but it simply does not exist.

 

God is not like a corrupt human being.

No, you attribute the human category of free will to God and his Creations. That is the problem.

 

Sure, if any human knew what all the winning lottery numbers were, they would always buy the winning ticket, or at least a few times, I know at least I would.

You would. I probably would not. But as the results (which the winning ticket is) is already known by God, there is nothing a human can do to alter what ticket will be the winning one. Therefore, the whole concept of attributing human free will to the idea of the determination of what the winning ticket will be, is flawed.

 

And is gambling not forbidden in the Bible itself?

 

For example, even though certain things have happened in God's foreknowledge, many of these things, He does not want to happen.

If we continue on the foreknowledge thing, you cannot even attribute freedom to God. Let alone what God wants. As he becomes a pawn in his own creation.

For if he has foreknowledge, he knows exactly what will happen. Yet at the same time in as far as divine foreknowledge is infallible, he is utterly unable to change the course of events. Were it otherwise, his foreknowledge would be fallible and flawed. Now the next step is to simply apply the resulting thoughts on the whole creation. Which results in unfreedom for God, as imposed by himself from the start of Creation.

 

God did not want Adam and Eve to eat the fruit, nor does He want anyone to go to hell.

Yet at the same time God was forced to create Paradise (he had foreknowledge). Was forced to create the plants, the trees, the stars, the sun, and even Man. Was already knowing as he created the Sun, that Jesus would necessarily die on the cross. That the French Revolution took place in 1789. That George W. Bush would win the Presidential elections. Knows who will be the next Prime Minister of the UK. God does not have Freedom then.

For if he wants something different than what he actually attains, there is a serious theological problem. Namely that God does have limitations - and that even God cannot avoid his own limitations. For if he attains that what is less than perfect, God himself is less than perfect.

 

What we perceive to be freedom of choice is a gross misunderstanding of the Divine. Freedom does not exist at all.

 

However, because He respects free-will, even if the foreknowledge is against His interest and purpose, He is not going to change it so that it will fit. So free-will is guaranteed.

Free-will is a joke. In your own argument God's will is not free. Because God cannot change things to make them fit. No matter how you look at that, that is a limitation. You, with limited understanding perceive it as free will. But that does not make it true.

 

Why exactly do you believe knowledge about a future event is contrary to free will? You are just asserting a view point, without providing any evidence or rational arguement to back up what you are saying.

That is what you are doing.

 

I could just as well say your assertions that God cant refer to one person by two names or more references is blasphemous because you are limiting God. If humans can handle nick names, other names, first, middle, last names, you are saying God cant do that - and you are calling my assertions blasphemous?

Yes. For a nickname is of no relevance to God - for humans that is a different matter. If it were, I'd change mine to Adonai or something like that. Isaiah - and furthermore we would not be judged differently on the basis of that, now would we?

[Bogun]

I have a couple things to say about if there is isn't hell. Think about a volcano if you will for a moment what is it made of? How far does it extend? I believe that Hell is in the center of the earth that;s why the earth gets hotter as you go toward the center of the earth. Now people in the Bible days did not know that hell was in the center of the earth yet they wrote that there would be fire and brimestone, and sulpher, and what is in the earth as you travel down we have disscoverd through machines that we invented that there is sulpher,brimestone etc as you go deeper into the earths service.That can't possible be a educated guess as you so clearly stated they were not an educated people. so how would they get that revelation could if be a that it was God inspired. I think so.

You believe hell is in the centre of the earth because its hot there? (By the way its only a theory that the planet has a molten core, no machine has been anywhere near the centre). So why not say hell is on the sun? And if it is at the centre of the earth, then most planets in the universe have hell in them.

 

you guys really make me laugh and honestly it is ashame that your hearts are so hardend to actual accepted Christ.

I won't speak for the others posting, but you and admiral are providing me with a daily dose of humour.

 

question for those who doubt God's existence. How do you explain a woman being heald from a peach size tumor in her eye. she went to church and was prayed for her tumor to dry up and when she went to the doctor they could not find one trace of cancer or even the tumor. How do you explain it? That's enough proof for me to say that there is a GOd. she stills has pictures of the tumor where did it go. Did it evolve away. i think not

Many people have recovered form severe cancer through various unorthodox treatments including meditation. If the tumour has gone, the cancer cells were destroyed by her body. This is not miraculous.

 

Admiral, I notice you haven't commented on my post about the gnostic christians. Do you doubt there existence? Do you dismiss them as being the work of the devil too?