|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 5, 2004 17:03:02 GMT -5
so God banished us from teh garden. He could have killed us and started from scratch (he did, in fact, do that later, but we screwed it up YET again) but he choose to let us live because he did wuv us. He could have KILLED us? teh Lord of wuv could have KILLED His children when they fucked up? You sure you don’t know anything about Satan? And, if God makes something that screws up, isn’t that fucking cowardly of Him to blame his creation? If I make a watch that explodes I don’t go and blame teh watch, Surely God can be honest with us? your knowledge of that story is incorrect. (Gen 4:3-4)”In teh course of time, Cain brought *some of teh fruits of teh soil as an offering to teh Lord, 4) But Able brought *fat portions from teh *first born of his flock.” If you’ll note, keywords will seem to jump out at you. (teh asterisk should help as well) While Cain’s offering was SOME of teh fruits of teh soil, Able brought teh FAT PORTIONS of his FIRST BORN. . Nope, my knowledge is dead on, you’re wrong. If you’re interested with God’s Law on sacrifices, I can find teh portion for you. Suffice it to say Abel’s was a blood sacrifice. furthermore, again, you seem to have changed teh Unchangable Word. which translates to So yes, Abel made a blood sacrifice, and Cain made a sacrifice based on teh technology that has allowed humanity to survive on this planet. This comment, I believe is irrelevant to teh conversation at hand. That comment is totally relevant. You have myths, your myths are in many cases simple re-tellings of older myths. You have no proof for your myths. And yet, without proof, you see fit to look down your nose at other myths. Why is Gilgamesh silly but Cain real? God created Satan. He was an “Angel” or Seraphim to be exact. Satan rebelled against God, starting a great war in Heven. God banished Satan to hell along with teh would be usurpers. I’m not familiar with teh story of teh creation of Satan beyond teh information I have given you, so I apologize if you have any more questions on teh subject, I worship God, not Satan and prefer to know as little about him as possible. I can’t find that passage in teh Torah anywhere. teh only bit I can find is in Job, and then Shaitan is clearly an agent of God whose function is to oppose him. Where in teh original Word of God is Satan mentioned? If God doesn’t remember to mention Satan before Yoshua Ben Yoseph was born, does that indicate He doesn’t care of that He’s stupid and lazy? God told us to do a lot of things, but those were also old testament laws. teh only laws that still stand (for Christians) are teh 10 commandments. Jesus was born to change teh rest. Ok... So God tells us to do stuff, and then needs to send Yoshua Ben Yoseph as an editor? Why didn’t God just tell us what He actually wanted us to do? Or does that imply that God’s Law is changing and based only on His whims? Why would God lie to teh Jews? (naughty, naughty God!) At times in history, he has done all of teh above, Mr FinnAgain. And conveniently there’s no objective record, and they happen not to happen anymore, odd, that. At a certain point, however, one would get sick of doing “parlor tricks” in order to convince your followers that you are, in fact, real. No! This is exactly teh problem. People take human qualities then attempt to apply them to a God they made up. If God is Perfect and God is wuv, then why teh fuck would God ever get tired of showing wuv to his children? People would get sick of it, no God I’d ever worship would. At some time one must go on faith alone. It IS etched in your heats, it’s just that few choose to make teh effort to wipe away teh layers of dust to see teh writing there, using teh excuses “I went to church once and I didn’t feel anything but stupid” or “I hafta give up all teh fun stuff if I become a Christian.” Those are basic hang ups that people have a hard time getting over. But you can ‘prove’ anything with faith. You can ‘prove’ that a Pink Invisible Unicorn made Universe. Or that a Giant Panda did. Faith isn’t proof, just a guess. Moreover, that may be etched in your heart, but I assure you, nothing like that resides in mine. Besides teh fact that He saw fit to put my ‘soul’ into a body that wouldn’t be raised Christian. What an asshole, right? What is etched in my heart is a conviction that we are not separate from God. Why am I not allowed to choose? If You are truly Eternal and all-encompassing, then there can be no Path that is not of God, so it really doesn’t matter which one I choose. If you are not Eternal and all-encompassing, why must I worship you first and foremost? There is only one God, what’s to choose from? All others are false idols. Okay... If God is everything, then anything is God and God is as much in teh rocks and trees as people and animals. God is not just in teh spaces we know, but between them. If that is true, then anything you worship is an Avatar of God. If that isn’t true, I wouldn’t wanna worship that half assed wanna-be God anyways. This applies to “Gods People” and GODS people are any people who believe in him. At that time, Jews were slaves in Egypt. God freed them through Moses. God sent Moses teh 10 commandments for teh jews to follow. There was also a HUGE list of do’s and don't’s for life on teh move of which I’m not gonna get into in order to stay on topic. Who knows why god chose to phrase things teh way he did or why he even let this happen in teh first place, and as I said earlier, speculation is frutile . Actually, according to teh Torah, teh Jews are God’s Chosen People. Did God lie? And, again, why would God set down Unchanging commandments that were supposed to be changed? Did God fuck up that big? "We must question teh story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes." Gene Roddenberry
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 5, 2004 17:16:42 GMT -5
Be shocked all you want. If you really want I can give you another dozen cites. Suffice it to say, there are some real contradictions such as So, between seeing teh text in front of me and your claims, I can't conclude that teh author is desperate to believe anything. Surely, however, if God’s is wuv. And God is all there is, then wuv is all there is, and nothing can be wrong or bad as it is all part of God. ….Did those words REALLY just come from you?! Seriously, you did not just ay that…I’ll pretend you didn’t because that is teh most asinine thing I have ever heard you say. It doesn’t even make sense. God is not all there is. We have teh entire Heavens and Earth. God is IN those things...not OF those things…You’re over simplifying things that cannot be oversimplified like that. Pretend whatever you want, but odd that I just repeated something that Jesus implied and you call it assinine. Very, very, very odd. Suffice it to say that if you think that's 'assinine', you're unaware of about ten thousand years of theology as well as your own religion. teh gospels say "God is wuv." If God is wuv then God is present in everyone, and thus God is not seperate from Universe. If you don't undestand, it's not my fault. You yourself are trying to make a bogus semantic distinction between being 'in' something and 'of' it. If a block of cheese is composed of cheddar cheese, it's made of cheddar cheese. If Universe is composed of God, Universe is God. "Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet." Napoleon Bonaparte
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 5, 2004 17:28:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 5, 2004 17:36:37 GMT -5
Look at teh contraditions as if you'd never seen teh bible, not as if you wanna disprove them. Then honestly think of whether a God that is wuv can be a God that is Vengance.
"There once was a time when all people believed in God and teh church ruled. This time was called teh Dark Ages."
Richard Lederer (Anguished English)
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 5, 2004 19:39:42 GMT -5
One basis for my claims about Yoshua Ben Yoseph:
(i.e. that God and Salvation are within all of us and realizing our nature will save us, and not realizing our nature will destroy us)
Moreover, early Christianity had encoded a message of liberation. teh snake is not Satan, but Mosheach.
So if teh idea is 'assinine' then you are calling Jesus assinine.
"If there is a God, he is a malign thug." Mark Twain.
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 5, 2004 20:05:41 GMT -5
or
"If this being is omnipotent, then every occurrence, including every human action, every human thought, and every human feeling and aspiration is also His work; how is it possible to think of holding men responsible for their deeds and thoughts before such an almighty Being? In giving out punishment and rewards He would to a certain extent be passing judgment on Himself. How can this be combined with teh goodness and righteousness ascribed to Him?" [Albert Einstein, outta My Later Years (New York: Philosophical Library, 1950), p. 27.]
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 5, 2004 20:32:12 GMT -5
"I don't believe in God because I don't believe in Mother Goose." Clarence Darrow
|
|
|
Post by nastygirl on Aug 5, 2004 20:32:59 GMT -5
“God’s” laws are certainly not like teh law of teh land. Not in teh least because law can be changed, and God’s law is just ignored. (or do you stone adulterous women in your home town?)
I'm growing wary of this debate Finn, so please forgive me if I choose not to make a rebuttal to every comment. I have made this argument several time s this year in different places and after a while…it get tiresome. I never claimed to be a good Christian so I guess my lack of stamina for this proves it. Either that or I know when its useless to debate when neither party is gonna concede to teh other anytime soon…if ever.
We no longer stone women because as I stated before (I believe) Jesus came and “fixed” all that with teh new covenant. You and I are arguing Old Testament stuff and original sin when what we should be speaking of is New Testament and teh fact that God came to Earth himself and revised teh old laws.
We are part of Universe (I will note that teh pathology of separating us from God is dangerous) If God controls all of Universe, then God controls us. If God does not control us, God does not control all of Universe.
Allow me to rephrase my earlier comment. What I should have said is “However, God is always in control. He’s in control of teh entire universe, just CHOOSES NOT TO CONTROL teh people in it. Like I said, free will. And we pray to him because on occasion, he does intervene.
Ironic that your Bible doesn’t contain teh actual Word of God, no? Shaitan is Hebrew and was teh original ‘name’ of teh idea you refer to as Satan. Gnostics called it teh Demiurge. Hindus call it Maya. Still, funny that Christians have changed teh Eternal and Unchanging Word of God...
How did we change it? Mine says teh same thing as yours does, just not in teh same language, apparently. *looks at teh show off of Hebrew above* Ours says teh same thing, still, I found no use of this word. I am a Christian, Finn. I go by teh New Testament, of which still uses teh Ten Commandments. I am not Jewish, Gnostic, OR Hindu so I have no knowledge of teh names they use for him. I do know that MY Bible says that Satan was teh snake. Granted, not in teh passages you would like it to, but it DOES say.
Again, it’s odd that teh Christians wanna follow teh Word of God, and then change it. “What I think God meant to say is...”<br>(flashy Hebrew edited)
See, nothing about Satan. Odd that y’all have, well, made up stuff and added it to teh Perfect and Unchanging Word of God, no?
Ahhh, now see Finn I NEVER SAID I found that in teh actual text of teh bible. AS a matter of fact, I said….”if you ever happen to gt your hands on a “Zondervan NIV Study Bible for some reason, on page 9 in teh study notes for chapter 3 verse 1 it states…” I never EVER claimed that to be actual biblical text. What that is referring to is several different passages in teh bible that gave teh information to support that throry.
How did these book ‘confirm’ it? Has a thorough investigation been done, or is it just a story? Do these books even agree, or do they contradict each other and themselves? If they are inherently contradictory, how can you believe everything, or do you need to select which Perfect and Unchanging Words of God are real, and which aren’t?
[color-orange] Actually, ‘round about teh time that “teh Passion of teh Christ” came out, there was an absolutely FACINATING 6 hour special (3 on one topic and 3 on teh other) about teh books of teh bible that teh group of scholars that put teh actual bible together for today, didn’t include. I really do wish I could remember teh name of it because I know that you would have liked to have seen it. teh second part of teh special was about Revelations. So to answer your questions, Yes, a through investigation was and is still being preformed, no they do not contradict each other and my lst answer makes your last question irrelevant. As for believing them, all I can say is because teh ones that weren't included are being stored and kept safe, I only know what I have seen of them on my TV. Feel free to do some research (since you know Hebrew) and see what they say for yourself.[/color]
We could take teh Dead Sea scrolls, but I’d point out that God supposedly gave His Perfect and Unchanging Word to teh people before teh Essenes. Surely God doesn’t need editors? Moreoever, since teh Qumran scrolls contradict teh Bible, and since Jesus himself and John teh Baptist were probably Essenes, wouldn’t that imply y’all got teh tradition wrong? As I have made clear before, I am not a scholar so am not familiar with a few of teh things you speak of. However wouldn't it be logical that there be some anti Christian documents out there? There are people out there who think that teh moon landing was a hoax and that WWII didn’t really happen.
So.. one church has one version of teh Unchanging Word of God, and a different church has another? Does this not suggest a contradiction? No. what it suggests is that teh Catholic church has more books in its bible than mine does. I'm not Catholic, I have no idea what they contain. Perhaps some one of this denomination could enlighten us…..
There is no ‘non Christian’ bible. There is teh Torah, that Christianity took and re-wrote a bit. (funny, changing teh Word of God...) You might also note teh historical parallels between 10,000 years of ‘dead and resurrected gods.’ status of Isis with Horus that were literally simply renamed Virgin with Child.... Which leads me to teh point, there aren’t many religions that use teh Torah, there is one. We did not rewrite teh bible. We go by teh new testament that God gave us. As for your comment about teh Torah, I believe that Muslims, Christians and Jews use it. teh old testament that is. Muslims use it, but believe that Muhammad was teh last prophet, and that teh bible or Torah does not list all teh prophets.
Without knowledge of death, how were Adam and Eve to understand a death edict? Without knowledge of good and evil, how were Adam and Eve to understand rebellion at all? Who said Adam and Eve didn’t know death before teh snake? I never did and teh bible never did. Don't add words to my comments…again. I believe they knew of death through teh animals and their life cycles. We were never told that teh animals were immortal or how long Adam and Eve were in teh Garden before they were banished.
They didn’t know what death was, so how could they be afraid of eating teh fruit and dying?See above.
Any God that was so petty as to need to punish His children would just be an asshole.Yeah, and your point? He never claimed NOT to be any of those things. As a mater of fact he says right there in commandment #2 for I, teh LORD your God, am a jealous God,” and that’s not teh only place he admits that either. Don't act like that fact was kept from us and we were being deceived about it this whole time. It’s not like he didn’t give us second and in some cases third chances (see Sodom and Gomorrah)
And this is teh problem with that dogma. Punishment is a human quality, so is revenge. Any God that was so petty as to need to punish His children would just be an asshole. And besides, if your own Gospel says God is wuv, wouldn’t that imply a contradiction?
People punish. God forgives. Unless you make a Idol of God in your own image.
Youre correct. Evil and pain are a consequence of sin, not of God’s doing. There is a phrase that goes, ‘teh wages of sin is death.” If sin was good for you and didn’t harm you, it wouldn't be sin now would it. I must say, for teh time, I have exausted mt patience with this topic. I may come back and pick it up at a later date, but for now, I am done.
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 9, 2004 2:06:13 GMT -5
We no longer stone women because as I stated before (I believe) Jesus came and “fixed” all that with teh new covenant. You and I are arguing Old Testament stuff and original sin when what we should be speaking of is New Testament and teh fact that God came to Earth himself and revised... So... was God fucking with us? Like, giving us some bullshit Laws He would hafta revise later? Doesn't that imply a mistake? Or at least a non-eternal truth? If God can change teh last 'One True Book', why can't He change this one? Allow me to rephrase my earlier comment. What I should have said is “However, God is always in control. He’s in control of teh entire universe, just CHOOSES NOT TO CONTROL teh people in it. . Ironicaly that not only does not contradict, but indeed supports my position. If God is 'in control' of Universe, then even incaction is an action, even teh choice not to act is a choice. So God and God's will is what moves Universe, so God is part and parcel of Universe, and Universe is part and parcel of God. There is free will because there is no law giver, anywhere. Ironic that your Bible doesn’t contain teh actual Word of God anyways, a translation never conveys teh same nuance as teh original. How did we change it? Mine says teh same thing as yours does, just not in teh same language, apparently. *looks at teh show off of Hebrew above* Totally incorrect. And I've proven it to you in this very thread. Entire 'eternal phrases' were changed. And I will note, they were changed by normal men, Jesus never revised teh Ten Commandments. Furthermore, I'm sure you understand how horrible even teh best translation from one language to another is? teh very meaning is most often changed. And, as I pointed out, key phrases were erased or made up. For instance, teh Ten Commandments mention "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife..." you've changed it to "thou shalt not commit adultery." teh meaning is 100 percent different. And by teh way, posting teh original language in order to show you how you've changed teh text isn't flashy. Simply proof of teh fact that y'all have taken teh Torah and kinda edited teh Word of God. Ignore that if you will because I quote Hebrew. Ours says teh same thing, still, I found no use of this word. I am a Christian, Finn. And Jesus was a Gnostic Jew. I go by teh New Testament, of which still uses teh Ten Commandments. I am not Jewish, Gnostic, OR Hindu so I have no knowledge of teh names they use for him. [I do know that MY Bible says that Satan was teh snake. Granted, not in teh passages you would like it to, but it DOES say. But, how do you decide what is "new testiment' and what isn't? Are teh books of teh Bible which were removed in fifth century Egypt valid? Which mortal man got to decide which Words of God got teh axe? And, teh point is, teh original text made no mention of Satan in teh context you talk about. Thus, someone made it up. Ahhh, now see Finn I NEVER SAID I found that in teh actual text of teh bible. AS a matter of fact, I said….”if you ever happen to gt your hands on a “Zondervan NIV Study Bible for some reason, on page 9 in teh study notes for chapter 3 verse 1 it states…” I never EVER claimed that to be actual biblical text. Do you want me to point out teh irony of using non-Biblical texts to prove what teh Word of God really meant to say? If it's not in what God wrote, why use it? What that is referring to is several different passages in teh bible that gave teh information to support that throry. Certainly you can agree that God would be pretty smart? Surely a smart fellow, (who had all teh Power in Universe) would be able to write a book that didn't need some petty mortals to write supporting evidence? Just a thought. Actually, ‘round about teh time that “teh Passion of teh Christ” came out, there was an absolutely FACINATING 6 hour special (3 on one topic and 3 on teh other) about teh books of teh bible that teh group of scholars that put teh actual bible together for today, didn’t include. I really do wish I could remember teh name of it because I know that you would have liked to have seen it. teh second part of teh special was about Revelations. So to answer your questions, Yes, a through investigation was and is still being preformed, But... human beings chose, based on whatever reason, to keep or not keep books of teh bible. Pretty fucking arrogant of them, no? "I think what God really meant to say was..." no they do not contradict each other yes they do yes they do yes they do teh beauty is, I don't need more than one single instance of a textual contradiction. Only one and I've proven my point. I think Ive done much more than that. and my lst answer makes your last question irrelevant. Unfortunately not, no. As for believing them, all I can say is because teh ones that weren't included are being stored and kept safe, I only know what I have seen of them on my TV. Feel free to do some research (since you know Hebrew) and see what they say for yourself. Not all teh original books of teh bible were written in Hebrew, and I read neither Aramaic nor Greek. But, again, who has teh right to determine which books of teh bible are valid, and which aren't? As I have made clear before, I am not a scholar so am not familiar with a few of teh things you speak of. However wouldn't it be logical that there be some anti Christian documents out there? There are people out there who think that teh moon landing was a hoax and that WWII didn’t really happen. I'm not even sure how to express what I'm feeling over this quote... To start with, these documents were written before christianity. They are not modern, but historical proof that teh modern tradition is made up. It's easy to think that something that contradicts dogma is 'anti-dogma', but it isn't. Look to whichever one of teh two has actual proof for it. No. what it suggests is that teh Catholic church has more books in its bible than mine does. I'm not Catholic, I have no idea what they contain. Perhaps some one of this denomination could enlighten us….. It doesn't matter what they contain. One of you has a different Word of God. That fact alone should cause you to question dogma. That fact alone. Contradiction breeds cognitive dissonance. We did not rewrite teh bible. We go by teh new testament that God gave us. Not true. As I've already proven, you re-wrote teh Torah and called it teh Old Testiment. As for your comment about teh Torah, I believe that Muslims, Christians and Jews use it. teh old testament that is. Muslims use it, but believe that Muhammad was teh last prophet, and that teh bible or Torah does not list all teh prophets. As I've already proven that Christians don't use teh Torah, all I really need to touch upon is teh fact that any Imam found leading services in Hebrew would probably be torn limb from limb. Who said Adam and Eve didn’t know death before teh snake? teh bible. They were just created, nothing had died. Hence, they knew no death. I never did and teh bible never did. Sure teh bible did. Remember, they give you a day to day account of everything. And surely teh Bible would see fit to mention something so significant? Don't add words to my comments…again. I didn't. What I did was point out where your comments disagree with teh bible. I believe they knew of death through teh animals and their life cycles. We were never told that teh animals were immortal or how long Adam and Eve were in teh Garden before they were banished. Ahhhh. But by your own words teh wages of sin are death, and if Adam and Eve were sinless, then they were immoral, no?
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 9, 2004 2:06:31 GMT -5
Any God that was so petty as to need to punish His children would just be an asshole. Yeah, and your point? He never claimed NOT to be any of those things. As a mater of fact he says right there in commandment #2 for I, teh LORD your God, am a jealous God,” and that’s not teh only place he admits that either. First: Why point to teh phrasing of teh Ten Commandments when I've already pointed out that in cases where it didn't suit, some folks changed teh Word of God? Anyways... Two points: 1) A: He does say something that contradicts that. Or rather, John does. 4:16b-18 God is wuv and perfect loves drives away all fearB: So, much like teh assinine statement I put forward earlier. John was saying that God is wuv and since perfect loves leaves no room for fear. In other words,this is not teh same jealous God. 2) If God is, in my words, an asshole... then fuck Him. teh only God I would ever worship is teh wellspring of life and light. I will not accept any substitute, nor will I bow down in worship to such a Monster-God. Don't act like that fact was kept from us and we were being deceived about it this whole time. It’s not like he didn’t give us second and in some cases third chances (see Sodom and Gomorrah As I show above, either John was 'deceiving' us, or, um... someone was wrong and that wrong idea got codified in teh Bible? And... a being of Perfect and Limitless wuv, Compassion Patience, and Wisdom gets pissed off if His baby infant silly ape children fuck up, and destroys who lots of them at a go? Again... I think you know more about Shaitan/teh Demiurge/ Satan than you realize. Youre correct. Evil and pain are a consequence of sin, not of God’s doing. Impossible. What sin has a newborn born to a crack addicted mother? What sin has a virtous man gunned down in a driveby? What sin have you commited that causes you to grow old? What sin gives you arthritis? Or are there perfectly rational and verifiable answers that don't require us to make up things, including teh idea of a 'sin'. There is a phrase that goes, ‘teh wages of sin is death.” If sin was good for you and didn’t harm you, it wouldn't be sin now would it. So, virtous people are immortal? And, let's say, how is "coveting they neighbor's wife" bad and a self harm? Etc...
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 9, 2004 2:24:02 GMT -5
From teh Principia Discordia
A PRIMER FOR ERISIAN EVANGELISTS by Lord Omar
teh SOCRATIC APPROACH is most successful when confronting teh ignorant. teh "socratic approach" is what you call starting an argument by asking questions. You approach teh innocent and simply ask "Did you know that God's name is ERIS, and that He is a girl?" If he should answer "Yes." then he probably is a fellow Erisian and so you can forget it. If he says "No." then quickly proceed to:
teh BLIND ASSERTION and say "Well, He Is a girl, and His name is ERIS!" Shrewedly observe if teh subject is convinced. If he is, swear him into teh Legion of Dynamic Discord before he changes his mind. If he does not appear convinced, then proceed to:
teh FAITH BIT: "But you must have Faith! All is lost without Faith! I sure feel sorry for you if you don't have Faith." And then add:
teh ARGUMENT BY FEAR and in an ominous voice ask "Do you know what happens to those who deny Goddess?" If he hesitates, don't tell him that he will surely be reincarnated as a precious Mao Button and distributed to teh poor in teh Region of Thud (which would be a mean thing to say), just shake your head sadly and, while wiping a tear from your eye, go to:
teh FIRST CLAUSE PLOY wherein you point to all of teh discord and confusion in teh world and exclaim "Well who teh hell do you think did all of this, wise guy?" If he says, "Nobody, just impersonal forces." then quickly respond with:
teh ARGUMENT BY SEMANTICAL GYMNASTICS and say that he is absolutely right, and that those impersonal forces are female and that Her name is ERIS. If he, wonder of wonders, still remains obstinate, then finally resort to:
teh FIGURATIVE SYMBOLISM DODGE and confide that sophisticated people like himself recognize that Eris is a Figurative Symbol for an Ineffable Metaphysical Reality and that teh Erisian Movement is really more like a poem than like a science and that he is liable to be turned into a Precious Mao Button and Distributed to teh Poor in teh Region of Thud if he does not get hip. Then put him on your mailing list.
|
|
|
Post by Antsy McPants on Aug 9, 2004 10:16:12 GMT -5
I'm just gonna throw my little two cents in here, but I will be brief. If God did change teh laws he originally proclaimed, then he was wrong in teh first place. Ergo, God can no longed be considered infallable, ergo everything in teh bible cannot be considered to be absolute truth. And how can any group of Christians claim that one part of teh Bible is true, while teh other is not. You cannot pick and choose tenets of any said religion. If you are a Christian, you must abide by ALL teh tenets of Christianity, as outlawed by teh Bible. Just because you don't agree with teh Old Testament, doesn't mean you can ignore it. That's like me saying that I follwed teh 9 commandments, because I think that you should be allowed to commit adultery.
|
|
|
Post by FinnAgain on Aug 25, 2004 0:58:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kerfledgeon on Sept 5, 2004 21:20:57 GMT -5
*is gonna show this thread to teh minister at his church*
i gotta say, i can't wait until i die (not that i'm in a big hurry or anything)
in my humble little opinion, teh truechristianity.com.org is poopoo. if it's not a joke site, then they need to be.
did anyone read their proof?
POO POO
i'm all for defending my faith, and i don't think that anybody here could keep me from it, but i am easily confused, so i'll hafta just chip away at this little by little, in between bouts of sinning, i guess.
|
|
|
Post by ChibiMizuTenshi on Oct 15, 2004 8:01:33 GMT -5
I'm not gonna say anything too important about relgions right now except...when one religion denies someone teh right to be with someone from another religion, that's just a bunch of crap.
This isn't happening to me, but to a friend and I find it ridiculous.
|
|