Challenge For Christians, Part 153,371

[Kratos]

This is probably where we agree to disagree. The Bible does define what being carnally and spiritually minded is (see Rom. 8).

 

I have no problem if other Christians or non-Christians or litteralists understand scripture differently than I do. It is not about getting it right, but about getting to know Him for ourselves.

 

I already answered why the Bible is not supposed to be easily understood without God's help. This was the plan as I see it to make us dependent upon Him so we will draw close to Him. If it was clear to the carnal mind as you would like it to be, we could remain totally independent of Him as you probably want to be.

 

Finally, my paraphrase of William James said that religion is only understood by those who ARE experiencing it. Not WERE AT ONE TIME experiencing it. Many of you stated that you did understand as I do while you believed. But now that you do not believe, you no longer understand it. This perfectly corresponds with what James said.

 

Have a nice night and sorry we could not get to an understanding other than to disagree, but sometimes this is best for all.

 

John

[Kuroikaze]

I already answered why the Bible is not supposed to be easily understood without God's help. This was the plan as I see it to make us dependent upon Him so we will draw close to Him. If it was clear to the carnal mind as you would like it to be, we could remain totally independent of Him as you probably want to be.

 

You say you want to understand us, but when you say things like this it certainly makes it seem that you aren't actually interested in that at all.

 

You again, fall to a personal attack by suggesting that the "REAL" reason we don't believe in god is to allow us to make choices without input from him. Is it so impossible for you to believe that people reject the notion because we find it unbelievable? Why do Christians feel the need to constantly psychoanalyze our choices?

 

If I thought it was true I would believe it no matter the consequences, it is not about avoiding god, such a concept would surely be absurd, it is about doubting things that appear doubtful, period. If you want to have an exchange of ideas, then you are going to have to shed your preconceptions about us.

[Neon Genesis]

This is probably where we agree to disagree. The Bible does define what being carnally and spiritually minded is (see Rom. 8).

As I said before, anyone could come along and easily twist that verse around to prove that their interpetation of the bible is right and yours isn't. Christians prove this by the very fact that they are so divided against each other through all their different belief systems and denominations, each one claiming to be the "true way." If it what was carnally and spiritually minded really was so clearly defined, then why can't Christians ever agree on what is carnal and what is spiritual? Why are Chrisitans so divided against each other if the bible's instrunctions were as clear as you claim they are?

 

I have no problem if other Christians or non-Christians or litteralists understand scripture differently than I do. It is not about getting it right, but about getting to know Him for ourselves.

That's not what Jesus said. Jesus commanded in Mark 3:3-26 for his followers to be united in their beliefs, otherwise they will not stand. If God's commands are clear, then it's clear that he wants Christians to be united in their beliefs yet you say that it isn't important for them to be united as long as they have a relationship with God. Futhermore, even Jesus said that not everyone who says Lord Lord shall enter the kindgom of heaven and that even the devil believes in Jesus. If getting to know God for ourselves is more important than being united in our beliefs, then why did Jesus command us to be united and say that not everyone who believes in God is going to heaven if they just believe? And if you really don't think it's important for our understanding of scripture to be right, why are you insisting that my opinion that Rom 8 does not define carnally and spiritually minded clearly is wrong and continue to insist that your opinion about the meaning of Rom 8 is true?

 

I already answered why the Bible is not supposed to be easily understood without God's help. This was the plan as I see it to make us dependent upon Him so we will draw close to Him. If it was clear to the carnal mind as you would like it to be, we could remain totally independent of Him as you probably want to be.

If Christians are really so dependent on God to lead them, then why is Christianity so divided with all the different denominations and belief systems? If they're really dependent on God, why can't Christians ever agree on anything that the bible says and instead twist around the meaning of the scriptures to make it suit their personal beliefs for their convience?

 

Finally, my paraphrase of William James said that religion is only understood by those who ARE experiencing it. Not WERE AT ONE TIME experiencing it. Many of you stated that you did understand as I do while you believed. But now that you do not believe, you no longer understand it. This perfectly corresponds with what James said.

 

 

 

John

If people can only understand religion while they're experiencing it, then how do some people convert to Christianity if they couldn't understand it without experinencing it?

[Kratos]

I already answered why the Bible is not supposed to be easily understood without God's help. This was the plan as I see it to make us dependent upon Him so we will draw close to Him. If it was clear to the carnal mind as you would like it to be, we could remain totally independent of Him as you probably want to be.

 

You say you want to understand us, but when you say things like this it certainly makes it seem that you aren't actually interested in that at all.

 

You again, fall to a personal attack by suggesting that the "REAL" reason we don't believe in god is to allow us to make choices without input from him. Is it so impossible for you to believe that people reject the notion because we find it unbelievable? Why do Christians feel the need to constantly psychoanalyze our choices?

 

If I thought it was true I would believe it no matter the consequences, it is not about avoiding god, such a concept would surely be absurd, it is about doubting things that appear doubtful, period. If you want to have an exchange of ideas, then you are going to have to shed your preconceptions about us.

 

Kuro,

 

I was only addressing one member on my post. I do not for a minute think that you are all the same as to why you are where you are. No more than you should lump all Christians in the same boat. It just seems to me that Neon kept going back to asking why God did not make His Word understandable to our carnal minds instead of making it spiritually discerned so it seems that this is how He wishes that it was instead of the way that it is.

 

I have had moments when I questioned my belief in God. We all have so I think I understand at least to some extent how this can happen. It just never stuck with me. So far, I have been able to hang on without knowing until these dark nights of the soul past and my faith returned. It could just as easily gone the other way with me. We really are not so different.

 

John

[Kratos]

Neon,

 

If we all believed the same way, Christianity would just be like any other social club with similar interests and beliefs. It is the very personal beliefs about the Word that makes us individually children of God with only Him in common.

 

John

[Grandpa Harley]

I still think that one could probably do the same trick as John is doing with the scripts of Babylon 5 or, even , The Simpsons... The book I turn to when I want some comfort or 'advice' is Legend by David Gemmell

[Neon Genesis]

Neon,

 

If we all believed the same way, Christianity would just be like any other social club with similar interests and beliefs. It is the very personal beliefs about the Word that makes us individually children of God with only Him in common.

 

John

Again, that is not what Jesus says in Mark 3:23-26. Jesus said, "So He called them to Himself and said to them in parables: “How can Satan cast out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. And if Satan has risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but has an end." Nowhere in those verses does Jesus say that it's ok to divide your religion into different denominations and belief systems and to preach how everyone else in your religion is wrong if they don't belong to your denomination. He's clearly commanding his followers to be united. Christianity is a house divided against itself. There are so many different denominations and belief systems that have all seperated from each other because they all thought they were the "one true way" and that everyone else is wrong and they all preach against each other. The Catholics preach against the Protestants and vice versa, the biblical literalists preach against the liberal Christians, the liberal Christians preach against the fundamentalists, and the Jevohah's Witnesses and Mormons preach against everybody else. Jesus said that if a house divided against itself, it cannot stand. If you think Christians aren't divided against each other, then you need to seriously open your eyes and go out into the real world to see for yourself just how divided they are.

 

You claim that it's the personal beliefs of Christians that make them individually children of God with only him in common but if Christians aren't united in their beliefs, how are non-believers supposed to know who the children of God are since they're all claiming to be the true children of God and that everyone else is fake? And by claiming that the personal beliefs about the word makes Chrisitans individually children of God, and that it isn't important for Christians to be united, you are once again proving my point that there is no right or wrong way to read the bible and that Christians just twist the scriptures around to support their arguments, which is precisesly what you are doing now with the verse in Mark 3:23-26. Again, if God/Jesus really meant that he thinks it's ok for Christianity to be divided against itself, then why didn't he make it clear that that's what he really means in Mark 3:23-26, so that it would be impossible to misinterpet the verses' meaning? And don't try to say it's so Christians will be dependent on God because I've already explained to you that Christians are not dependent on God at all, otherwise they would be united if they really were. Once again, you have proven my point that there are no clear instructions on how to read the bible and anyone can twist the scriptures' meanings to fit their arguments, otherwise we wouldn't be disagreeing on what Mark 3:23-26 really means if the bible's instructions on how to read it really were so clear.

 

I was only addressing one member on my post. I do not for a minute think that you are all the same as to why you are where you are. No more than you should lump all Christians in the same boat. It just seems to me that Neon kept going back to asking why God did not make His Word understandable to our carnal minds instead of making it spiritually discerned so it seems that this is how He wishes that it was instead of the way that it is.

So, making assumptions about why one person doesn't believe somehow makes it better than making assumptions about everyone? How nice of you. Would you like it if I made assumptions about your beliefs and claimed that you only believed in God because you were too afraid of losing your invisible security blanket? So, why do you make assumptions about why somebody doesn't believe in something, especially when you claim that you're here to "get to know us" but you turn around and make assumptions about why I don't believe without "getting to know me" first. Now what was that about showing respect to others?

[Kratos]

Neon,

 

Jesus was talking about His Kingdom and it is not divided nor has it ever been divided. Christianity is a means to an end of introducing men to the Kingdom and teaching them how to relate spiritually to God and one another. Judaism was a means to an end to bring forth Christ and Christianity will bring many other sons of God to glory as was its intended purpose.

 

As I see it, Christianity is quickly fulfilling its purpose and about to pass away as God's focus on the earth. It is an "in part" manifestation of the Kingdom on earth, but we look forward to the fulness of the Kingdom without mixture to come.

 

I am not a fool and it is a fool's errand to try to defend Christianity as anything than one imperfect step along the path in God's purpose. I have stated many times that being a Christian only gets you in the front door to becoming something. It is not an end in itself and all but the most ardent denominational believers know this full well. Jesus was not a Christian and no one will be in the age to come. It will all just be a Father and His children in a Kingdom that is not divided when it is all said and done.

 

John

[The-Captain]

Neon,

 

Jesus was talking about His Kingdom and it is not divided nor has it ever been divided. Christianity is a means to an end of introducing men to the Kingdom and teaching them how to relate spiritually to God and one another. Judaism was a means to an end to bring forth Christ and Christianity will bring many other sons of God to glory as was its intended purpose.

 

As I see it, Christianity is quickly fulfilling its purpose and about to pass away as God's focus on the earth. It is an "in part" manifestation of the Kingdom on earth, but we look forward to the fulness of the Kingdom without mixture to come.

 

I am not a fool and it is a fool's errand to try to defend Christianity as anything than one imperfect step along the path in God's purpose. I have stated many times that being a Christian only gets you in the front door to becoming something. It is not an end in itself and all but the most ardent denominational believers know this full well. Jesus was not a Christian and no one will be in the age to come. It will all just be a Father and His children in a Kingdom that is not divided when it is all said and done.

 

John

 

You certainly have developed an interesting theology Kratos. My question is why do you bother attaching yourself to the xian label? Im not trying to be rude but your practically preaching a new religion, why not call it as such and save alot of confusion. This talk of ages and an ancient cycle of moving towards god cannot be found in the bible without some serious reinterpretation. Why not do away with the rest of the baggage and call your thoughts what they are, your own original spin on god and spirituality.

[Neon Genesis]

Once again Kratos, as I said, I fail to see where in those verses does it suggest that it's ok for Christians to divide themselves through all their different denominations and belief systems, and I fail to see where it is stated that Jesus is talking about his heavenly kindgom in those verses. Where in those verses does Jesus talk about heaven or the afterlife? Where in those verses does he ever reference his own kingdom? In verse 23, it states that Jesus called his followers to him and told them this message in parables. If Jesus was not warning his followers to be united in their beliefs, then why do these verses suggest that Jesus is addressing his followers to be united? If he really meant that he was talking about his heavenly kindgom and not about Christianity, then why didn't he make it clear that that's what he really means so that there would be no misinterpations as to what it means?

 

And this isn't the only verse where Jesus pleas for his followers to be united. In John 17:11, Jesus prays to God (praying to himself?), "Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are." I fail to see where in this verse does it suggest that Jesus is speaking about his heavenly kindgom when he asks for his followers to be united. In fact, in this verse it seems he is addressing for those still in the world to be united as one as he and his father are one when he states "these are in the world".

 

If Jesus was not speaking about his followers and is really speaking about his heavenly kindgom, why did he pray for "these in the world" to be united? If Jesus didn't care about Christianity being united, then why did he bother sending the Holy Spirit to lead Christians to understand their beliefs in the first place? If it doesn't matter that Christianity is united, why do you keep insisting that your way of reading the bible is the right way and keep insisting that the bible is clear about its definitions of what it means to be "carnally" and "spiritually" minded? As I keep saying, if the bible was really clear as to what it means to be "carnally" or "spirutally" minded, then we wouldn't be debating with each other as to what the meaning of the scriptures are in the first place. Again, the fact that you are insisting that my interpetation of the meaning of Mark 3 is wrong and that yours is right further proves my point that there is no right or wrong way to read the bible, contrary to your claims.

[Kratos]

Jesus was always speaking about His Kingdom. Show me where He ever said anything about Christianity. The Bible says that since John the Baptist the Kingdom of God has been preached and people are pressing into it. To me, what we call Christianity is what man has done to try to naturalize and control the Kingdom on earth. Jesus went forth preaching the Kingdom of God and He sent His disciples preaching the gospel of the Kingdom.

 

He made it clear that the Kingdom is not something that can be naturally observed as if we can say it is here or over there. Yet, that is exactly what organized Christianity has tried to do with it. Each claiming to be the Kingdom of God and say that it is in their church or their organization.

 

Jesus said that the Kingdom is within us. A Kingdom is defined by where the dominion of the King is manifested. If Jesus is your Lord than you are in the Kingdom and if He is not then you are not.

 

It is very personal and internal in the spirit. The idea of a natural, man-ruled organization or denomination that is the Kingdom or the way to Heaven is from the Tower of Babel and not from God.

 

John

[Grandpa Harley]

You realise, of course, none of this is communicable in Aramaic... the verb structures don't allow it, the view of the Kingdom to come isn't supportable in the Aramaic mindset of the time (after AD70 it became more Helenised)... most of what you are saying is 'THE correct' way to read the bible wasn't possible to say in Aramaic. It's wholly Greco-Latinate, and if it needed transalting into Greek to make it work, then God really should have dropped the idea into the Greek's heads, not some Jewish Carpenter's... I'm sorry but you really are just making it up as you go along... you may as well by using Thoreau as your bench mark... at least what he was implying was possible to say in his native tongue

[Neon Genesis]

Jesus was always speaking about His Kingdom. Show me where He ever said anything about Christianity.

Uh, I just gave you an example before where Jesus prays for followers IN THIS WORLD to be united. You want another example? Ok, how about Mark 16:15-16? Jesus says, "And He said to them, “GO INTO ALL THE WORLD and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." Here Jesus is telling his followers to go into the WORLD and preach the gospel, baptizing and converting people to being his followers. If Jesus didn't want his followers to be united and wasn't talking about Christianity but is talking about his heavenly kingdom, then why did Jesus tell the apostles to go into the WORLD and convert people? Again, you are proving my point that there is no right way to read the bible and you are just like every other Christian out there who twists the bible's verses to fit any of their beliefs. Stop dodging my questions and answer them, if there is a right way to read the bible and the bible is so clear as to what it means to be "carnally minded" and "spiritually minded", then why are we continuing this debate? Because if it was clear, we wouldn't be debating in the first place. And if Jesus doesn't care that Christians are united, why are you continuing to insist that my opinion about the meaning of these verses is wrong and yours is right?

 

The Bible says that since John the Baptist the Kingdom of God has been preached and people are pressing into it. To me, what we call Christianity is what man has done to try to naturalize and control the Kingdom on earth. Jesus went forth preaching the Kingdom of God and He sent His disciples preaching the gospel of the Kingdom.

 

He made it clear that the Kingdom is not something that can be naturally observed as if we can say it is here or over there. Yet, that is exactly what organized Christianity has tried to do with it. Each claiming to be the Kingdom of God and say that it is in their church or their organization.

Ok, now you're just flip-flopping. First you say Jesus sent his disciples to preach the gospel, then you turn around and say that Christianity has tried to naturalize the kingdom yet it was the disciples themselves that started Christianity in the first place. If Jesus doesn't care for Christians to be united, then why does the Holy Spirit lead Christians? Unless you're somehow suggesting the Holy Spirit is purposely leading Christians to divide themselves and hate each other? And if there isn't supposed to be one true church but it's perfectly ok for everything to be divided, answer my question as to why do you continue to insist that your way of reading the bible is the right way and that my way of reading the bible is wrong and that my way of reading the bible must be unified with your way of reading it in order to properly understand the meaning of these verses?

 

Jesus said that the Kingdom is within us. A Kingdom is defined by where the dominion of the King is manifested. If Jesus is your Lord than you are in the Kingdom and if He is not then you are not.

If that's what Jesus really meant, and that all you have to do to be in the kingdom is to accept Jesus as your Lord, then why did Jesus say that not everyone who says "Lord, Lord" will enter the heaven? Please actually show some respect to other people and stop dodging my questions and answer them.

 

It is very personal and internal in the spirit. The idea of a natural, man-ruled organization or denomination that is the Kingdom or the way to Heaven is from the Tower of Babel and not from God.

 

John

But by preaching your own version of the gospel and insisting that other people's ways of reading the bible are false and your way of reading it is the right way, aren't you just contradicting yourself by starting your own man-ruled organization by insisting that everyone has to conform to your new way of reading the bible? Aren't you basically starting Kratosism here and insisting that our way of reading the bible is wrong and that we have to convert to Kratosism's way of reading the bible? And if you're really against man-ruled organizations, why do you continue to quote the bible to prove your points when the bible is a collection of stories written at different times that were complied together in a single book by a man-ruled organization called the Council Of Nicaea?

[Kratos]

Neon,

 

I respectfully ask that you agree to disagree. I have consistently answered your questions to the best of my ability, but because you do not like my answers, you accuse me of disrespect and dodging the questions. You cannot hear me because I speak another language as AM would point out.

 

The disciples preached the gospel of the Kingdom and men took this and organized it into what we know as Christianity today. Jesus said that His Kingdom cannot be observed in the world and that His Kingdom was not of this world. He sent the disciples into the world to call men out of the world and into the Kingdom. There is perfect unity in the Kingdom and we all press into the Kingdom as we change our beliefs and ideas to line up with His. We are all at different places as we are conformed to His image so we all have part of it right and part of it wrong so there is no unity among men.

 

Jesus taught us to pray that His Kingdom would come as His will is done on earth as it is in Heaven. When I line my will up to His, I am acting as a citizen of the Kingom and when I act on my own in disagreement with His will, I have again stepped out of the Kingdom and into this world. This is why just calling Him Lord does not make you a part of the Kingdom as is taught in the "sinner's prayer" doctrine. It is actually making Him your Lord and living in agreement with His will that makes you a citizen of His Kingdom.

 

I don't know how else to explain it.

 

John

[Neon Genesis]

Neon,

 

I respectfully ask that you agree to disagree. I have consistently answered your questions to the best of my ability, but because you do not like my answers, you accuse me of disrespect and dodging the questions. You cannot hear me because I speak another language as AM would point out.

Don't you dare say you're being respectful and then turn around and make assumptions that are total lies as to why I feel that you aren't answering my questions. I can't not like your answers because you aren't giving me any answers to like or not like. I have repeatedly pointed out in places in my post that you continue to ignore and yet here you are putting your fingers into your ears going "la la la I can't hear you" and insisting that I don't like your non-existent answers that I can't choose to like or not like because you have not given any and I have pointed out repeatedly where it is you aren't. And I thought you said earlier in the post that the bible was supposed to be like a translator's dictionary? Since you say you're speaking in "another language", then why aren't we understanding each other when we're both using the bible to back up our points which is supposed to be some great translator of yours? You're also completely flip-flopping in your arguments. One minute you say that it's not important for Christians to be united, the next minute you keep claiming that I'm not seeing the meaning of the bible verses the same way you are which is supposedly the right way to read it, proving my point that there is no right way to read the bible because if it was, we wouldn't be discussing this to begin with.

 

It is actually making Him your Lord and living in agreement with. His will that makes you a citizen of His Kingdom.

 

I don't know how else to explain it.

 

John

Again, you are flip-flopping. Earlier in the thread you said that it was not important for his followers to be united, now you're back-tracking in your arguments and claiming that we do have to be in agreement with the Lord. Which one is it? Christians can't both be in agreement with the Lord and be divided at the same time, that's compltely impossible and contradictory. You are being dishonest with your proof arguments and last I checked, being dishonest was a form of disrespect. Now what was that about being respectful?

[Grandpa Harley]

Neon,

 

I respectfully ask that you agree to disagree. I have consistently answered your questions to the best of my ability, but because you do not like my answers, you accuse me of disrespect and dodging the questions. You cannot hear me because I speak another language as AM would point out.

 

The disciples preached the gospel of the Kingdom and men took this and organized it into what we know as Christianity today. Jesus said that His Kingdom cannot be observed in the world and that His Kingdom was not of this world. He sent the disciples into the world to call men out of the world and into the Kingdom. There is perfect unity in the Kingdom and we all press into the Kingdom as we change our beliefs and ideas to line up with His. We are all at different places as we are conformed to His image so we all have part of it right and part of it wrong so there is no unity among men.

 

Jesus taught us to pray that His Kingdom would come as His will is done on earth as it is in Heaven. When I line my will up to His, I am acting as a citizen of the Kingom and when I act on my own in disagreement with His will, I have again stepped out of the Kingdom and into this world. This is why just calling Him Lord does not make you a part of the Kingdom as is taught in the "sinner's prayer" doctrine. It is actually making Him your Lord and living in agreement with His will that makes you a citizen of His Kingdom.

 

I don't know how else to explain it.

 

John

 

and how do you explain that most of what you're saying is meant wasn't possible to be even considered in Aramaic? It's like claiming the Pirahã people have a complex numbering system when it actually ends at 2... I state again, the ideas fly in Greek or Latin, but not in Aramaic... what language did first century Palestinian carpenter speak and think in?

[Kratos]

Neon,

 

I respectfully ask that you agree to disagree. I have consistently answered your questions to the best of my ability, but because you do not like my answers, you accuse me of disrespect and dodging the questions. You cannot hear me because I speak another language as AM would point out.

 

The disciples preached the gospel of the Kingdom and men took this and organized it into what we know as Christianity today. Jesus said that His Kingdom cannot be observed in the world and that His Kingdom was not of this world. He sent the disciples into the world to call men out of the world and into the Kingdom. There is perfect unity in the Kingdom and we all press into the Kingdom as we change our beliefs and ideas to line up with His. We are all at different places as we are conformed to His image so we all have part of it right and part of it wrong so there is no unity among men.

 

Jesus taught us to pray that His Kingdom would come as His will is done on earth as it is in Heaven. When I line my will up to His, I am acting as a citizen of the Kingom and when I act on my own in disagreement with His will, I have again stepped out of the Kingdom and into this world. This is why just calling Him Lord does not make you a part of the Kingdom as is taught in the "sinner's prayer" doctrine. It is actually making Him your Lord and living in agreement with His will that makes you a citizen of His Kingdom.

 

I don't know how else to explain it.

 

John

 

GH,

 

Jesus spoke in spiritual words and you are correct that most of the people of His time did not understand what He was saying because people could not be born of the spirit until after His death. He said that His words were spirit and life and often expressed His frustration that they could not hear what He was saying. This is a further proof that natural languages are not the key. Those He spoke to understand perfectly either Aramaic or Greek or Hebrew, but they could not hear what He was saying so studying dead languages yield little true Bible understanding. It is in understanding the language of the spirit that we understand.

 

Jihn

 

and how do you explain that most of what you're saying is meant wasn't possible to be even considered in Aramaic? It's like claiming the Pirahã people have a complex numbering system when it actually ends at 2... I state again, the ideas fly in Greek or Latin, but not in Aramaic... what language did first century Palestinian carpenter speak and think in?

[Kratos]

GH,

 

I guess I inserted my answer in the quote between what Neon said and you said. I do not have an edit button.

 

John

[Kratos]

Neon,

 

It is relational and not informational. I am a part of the Kingdom as I am faithful to what I believe He wants me to do. I am not judged by being right over every crossed t and dotted i. Agreement with the Lord is a heart condition where rebellion is the opposite. The Kingdom is within in the heart and not without in the head.

 

Now, if you still think I have not answered your questions, perhaps you would make it easy for me and present them in a list of one sentence questions that are numbered. I really cannot figure out what you are asking as my answers never seem to hit the mark.

 

John

[Grandpa Harley]

Well, you've now proved that circular logic is your crutch... thus no logic at all. Thus, to all intents a purpose,you have nothing to say, other than pumping out noise and insanity, along with a deliberate abstruseness and tendency to spout gibberish... Still it covers your essential, solipistic ignorance... which you seem to parade as though its gems of wisdom, when it is really just a sounding brass...

 

You're talking bollocks, you know you're talking bollocks and you just keep getting ever more vague when it's pointed up... You are now officially on my 'Fucking Irritating' list... I don't come here to be plagued by your sort... you make me irascible... you did when you arrived, and you're still doing it...

 

You never did explain the Martyr for Christ shit... I want to know more about that...

[R. S. Martin]

Sure, you say "in my opinion" when you say "God is a spirit" but you insist that we accept that God exists.

 

Ruby,

 

Please tell me how I insist that anyone accept anything that I believe as the truth? Please give examples where I insisted thta anyone else accepts that God exists.

 

John

 

I thought I did. That was the example. You won't speak to us on any other premises so it seems you insist we accept God's existence. In the very act of talking about what God is and what his word is you are insisting that God exists. How so? Because we could not talk about God being spirit if God did not exist, nor could there be a God's Word if God did not exist.

 

I didn't check all the posts just now, but didn't you also make the claim somewhere in this thread that a person had to be spiritual to understand God? And thereby imply that as a Christian you were spiritual enough to actually understand God? Yes you did. I looked just now. In Post 22 you quoted 1 Cor. 2:14. Kratos (John is too nice a name for you, IMO), that "puts a price on your head," so to speak.

 

You're coming onto a forum of people who have lived religion and found it thoroughly wanting--so thoroughly wanting that we actually put our very identities on the line--and you dare tell us we never understood what god is all about. In addition you presume to tell us YOU have special knowledge because YOU are a Christian and only Christians have this knowledge because the Bible says so. DISGUSTING!

 

Exactly who or what gives the Bible that amount of authority?

 

God.

 

How can God do that?

 

By existing.

 

If you do not thereby insist that we accept God's existence, exactly what do you think you are doing???

 

We have two choices:

a) We can choose to totally ignore you, or

b ) We can choose to speak with you on your presupposition that God exists.

So far as I can see, that is the only choice we've got. If I talk with you it is my choice. I confess that. However, you have to admit that you do insist that all who talk with you must do so on the presupposition that God exists.

 

Does that answer your question?

[R. S. Martin]

Neon,

 

I respectfully ask that you agree to disagree.

 

If you truly mean to agree to disagree, then for goodness sake just SHUT UP!

 

I don't understand why you are still replying to Neon. It makes no sense. You are breaking your word. Apparently you don't mean what you say. Not that Christians can be trusted but still....I did not expect to see you anymore in this thread after I saw that post.

 

Now let's see how much conviction the Spirit carries with my words when they don't agree with your fleshly desires.

[R. S. Martin]

You never did explain the Martyr for Christ shit... I want to know more about that...

 

Gramps, I think this is supposed to be it:

 

Publicly, never... however, the phrase 'martyr for Christ' has skipped merrily from your keyboard... that means, at least to me, a number of your protestations ring somewhat hollow. However, I'd be interested to hear your side of the reason that someone with no interest in prosletysing would use such a phrase in a communication...

 

<snip>

 

Anyway, when discussing with another who will remain nameless that I was having a hard time visiting this site as the people seemed so hateful and vulgar in the Lion's Den, I was reminded that we are called to mingle silently as Jesus set an example of touching others that most of religion has failed to learn, thus my mention of being martyrs or witnesses. I guess you might say that this is still very close to trying to reconvert, but I do not look at it that way. Salvation is between God and the individual, but our part is to not separate from others so that ignorance will not win the day.

 

John

[Kratos]

Neon,

 

I respectfully ask that you agree to disagree.

 

If you truly mean to agree to disagree, then for goodness sake just SHUT UP!

 

I don't understand why you are still replying to Neon. It makes no sense. You are breaking your word. Apparently you don't mean what you say. Not that Christians can be trusted but still....I did not expect to see you anymore in this thread after I saw that post.

 

Now let's see how much conviction the Spirit carries with my words when they don't agree with your fleshly desires.

 

Works for me.

 

John

[Grandpa Harley]

Publicly, never... however, the phrase 'martyr for Christ' has skipped merrily from your keyboard... that means, at least to me, a number of your protestations ring somewhat hollow. However, I'd be interested to hear your side of the reason that someone with no interest in prosletysing would use such a phrase in a communication...

 

GH,

 

As you appear to be a scholar not unfamiliar with scripture, I am sure that you are aware that the Greek for "witnesses" is martyr (as in Acts 1). When Jesus told the disciples to go into the world and witness for Him, he did not mean go around knocking on people's doors while they are having dinner or standing on street corners with sandwich board signs shouting for repentence and handing out Bible tracts. He meant to not seperate yourself as the religious Jews did, but to follow His example and mingle with everyone so your light can shine.

 

Admittedly, my light has been viewed as pretty dim, but I do make an effort to get to know all kinds of people and to let all kinds of people get to know me. I think this helps those burned by religion to see that all those who believe in God are not intolerant nut jobs (though you might say I failed) and it gives me a chance to know that non-believers have valid reasons for their non-belief other than just being devil incarnates. (that is a joke).

 

Anyway, when discussing with another who will remain nameless that I was having a hard time visiting this site as the people seemed so hateful and vulgar in the Lion's Den, I was reminded that we are called to mingle silently as Jesus set an example of touching others that most of religion has failed to learn, thus my mention of being martyrs or witnesses. I guess you might say that this is still very close to trying to reconvert, but I do not look at it that way. Salvation is between God and the individual, but our part is to not separate from others so that ignorance will not win the day.

 

John

Where to begin with this... let us see...

 

You open with a defence from a dead language... which you've already said doesn't apply... then accuse us of ignorance. We can at least read ENGLISH to something a little above grade school level, and you bald faced admit you're doing a Typhoid Mary with your inane (not to say insane) superstition... I had you pegged correctly out of the box... you are an intolerant, ignorant, nutjob, who parades his ill informed eisegesis like it is a new revelation. Well, I'm certain the book you throw around the quotes from with such gay abandon, and means that women are second class and Gay folk are an abomination in your mind, has some pretty strong words on hypocrisy and hubris, both being good Classical 'Dead' language words.

 

you may see yourself at some level as a 'second' Paul... well, remember Paul's alleged end in Rome (for which there is no evidence, it's a Catholic myth to allow Peter to hand Paul the mantle of Rock of the Church, but that is a tale for another day...) One thing about the tales of the martyrs... the only ones you can find who are historically verifiable are very late in the day, and often they were abandoned to their fate by the church simple because they were trouble makers and heretics, who then were fast tracked to sainthood to become acceptable to TPTB... Mostly, and like a lot of your posts, the tales are those told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

 

And I'd suggest that you keep the word 'ignorance' out of your posts. It's insulting to those here who HAVE studied, and HAVE reached a radically different conclusion to you... I'm certain your 'struggles' with the faith did not extend to research into why your doubts could be correct, only why they WERE wrong. That, sir, is not a 'struggle', it's pandering.

 

You said about vulgar and hateful... Well, I find your opinions both, and disgustingly primitive as a cherry on the top. There is nothign to like and less to respect in them. If they stop you from killing yourself, going back on the booze or drugs, or hurting others, then fine.. It's what keeps you good, and gets you out of bed for one more day. Go with God, but don't mistake that your way is the only one. That is hubris and arrogance, and it's been established by the bulk of the membership here there's no need for a god to keep good.