An Invitation To Sub_zer0 And Any Fundamentalist To Discuss Spirituality

[Guest sub_zer0]

George Bush is a symbol of the free world. George Bush is a real person. Sub, you do not understand language here. A rose is a symbol of love. A gold ring is a symbol of marriage. Christ is a symbol of love. Etc. So yes, Christ is a symbol, and whether he was god, man, or myth is irrelevant to the role he plays as a symbol of human aspirations. It is in this context I speak at all times when I say symbol.

 

(Technically the proper term in semiotics is "sign", but "symbol" is the more colloquial word that's less confusing than using the word "sign")

 

Jesus does indeed play a role as a symbol of human aspirations, but what is the point of living to up to that when you don't even believe what Christ called Himself? It is not irrelevant. It means nothing if you do not think of Him as He called Himself, the Son of God and the way, the truth and the life.

 

Let's try this again. God is love. God shows His love through Christ. So Christ is a symbol of not only love, but God's love for us!

[monsterfeets]

Jesus does indeed play a role as a symbol of human aspirations, but what is the point of living to up to that when you don't even believe what Christ called Himself? It is not irrelevant. It means nothing if you do not think of Him as He called Himself, the Son of God and the way, the truth and the life.

Why would it mean any less? Even madmen can speak the truth. How many artists and poets went off their rockers, but we see wisdom in what they are saying, we are inspired by them. Spiritual music can inspire athiests as much as secular music can inspire a Christian. How about literary characters? We can admire what they stand for without believing they ever existed. The truth Christ stood for is not Christ exclusive. Love each other is universal. It seems that saying it doesnt matter to him because it doesnt have a sign on it that says "For Jesus" seems silly and exclusionary. Why would the God of everything that is need every good thing attributed to him specifically if he was the one who created it in the first place?

 

And how can anything done in the NATURE of God (which is love) be against God? Are there two different brands of love you can buy in the existential supermarket? Jesus Brand and the generic off brand? I dont understand why any act of kindness and love wouldn't matter to him. All the acts of hatred sure seem to, no matter who they're "for".

[Guest sub_zer0]

A human can share with others what they believe true love has shown them. They can point the way and give insight but they alone are not the way...it's when one believes they have cornered a "truth" and are the only way to god is when religious laws, regulations and threats come into play. If one has love, they have god and god is love. Love does not threaten, nor condemn, nor administer cruel and unusual punishment, nor is love picky...unconditional love that is. Does your "god" have conditional or unconditional love? If it is conditional, then yours is not a god of love but rather of intolerance and hate which in turn causes fear and destruction...it's evidence is everywhere.

 

Christ pointed the way, which is Himself, so Christ is the way as He says He is.

 

No, love is not a replacment for God as you are trying to put it. It is if one has God, one has love.

 

God has unconditional love for all, but through that love He gives us choice to accept Him or not.

 

Doesn't the bible say that god is love? Isn't god manifesting through you? How can one love and not have god? Hmmmm? Where in the bible does it say that love is evil?

 

Exactly my question to you, how can one love without God? You say that if one has love, they have God. I am saying that if one has God they love because God is love.

 

Um, you don't think that Christ was the first to promote love and peace do you? LOL...the message of love was around thousands of years before Christ. This IS what we are TRYING to get you to see...if God is "love" then "Love" has been around forever. Each period has people within it who have taught this same thing and then some buttholes try and take and make their way the only way. That is what must be sifted out.

 

I never said that Christ is the first to promote love. Indeed God has been around forever.

 

No, love shows through anyone willing to embrace and seek it.

 

Wrong, love is God and through Christ we can find that.

 

Why would it mean any less? Even madmen can speak the truth. How many artists and poets went off their rockers, but we see wisdom in what they are saying, we are inspired by them. Spiritual music can inspire athiests as much as secular music can inspire a Christian. How about literary characters? We can admire what they stand for without believing they ever existed. The truth Christ stood for is not Christ exclusive. Love each other is universal. It seems that saying it doesnt matter to him because it doesnt have a sign on it that says "For Jesus" seems silly and exclusionary. Why would the God of everything that is need every good thing attributed to him specifically if he was the one who created it in the first place?

 

The love that Christ has is exclusive as that love is God, or Himself. Love is universal but love produced by faith in Christ, sadly is not.

 

And how can anything done in the NATURE of God (which is love) be against God? Are there two different brands of love you can buy in the existential supermarket? Jesus Brand and the generic off brand? I dont understand why any act of kindness and love wouldn't matter to him. All the acts of hatred sure seem to, no matter who they're "for".

 

Love can only be done in the nature of God by having His nature, namely faith in Christ and the Holy Spirit of God. Without that love is not done in the nature of God.

 

Why would God concern Himself with works of people who do not even recognize Him?

What do you think love is?

[Anakin]

Now here's the question of real substance. First of all, yes and no. This topic was an invitation to you to share your experiences and thoughts about spirituality; it was also an invitation to any fundamentalist. I am interested in hearing what you and other fundamentalists have to say on this topic, and it has proved to be very fruitful for many people. I appreciate your participation. But to clarify, the topic isn't about you specifically.

 

Now, are you asking me sincerely how I/others are not seeing your heart? Are you genuinely concerned about why we are feeling you are not? I want to answer you honestly and respectfully, but I really need to hear you say that it means something to you, that you care that we are feeling you are unresponsive to others. I don't want to just bat that back and forth. Do you care how we feel about what we are hearing from you personally?

AM you are one patient dude. I hope Zero returns the sincerity you and others have extended

to him.

 

Zero, earlier you stated that we have all spoken of you terribly. If you're thinking of the

"One Verse" thread also I'd agree somewhat. But in this thread I don't see it. Or maybe

I just missed it. In my earlier post in this thread, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.

I honestly thought I saw conflict in you. Your heart saying one thing but your mind saying

another. Perhaps I was wrong.

[SkepticOfBible]

Why would God concern Himself with works of people who do not even recognize Him?

 

Does you God atleast recognises the works of the following christians

 

1)Mormons

2)JW

3)Catholics

4)Orthodox

5)Syrian Coptic

6)Armenian Bible

7)Ethiopic

 

Or are you gonna assert your god is only concerned with those christians who follow the protestant bible

 

Likewise you all speak terribly for and about me. But I am defending Christ here and you are not, so answer the questions then. Is Jesus the way the truth and the life?

 

The Jews don't seem to accept your theological whims or your god-man called "Jesus" as being very important to their spirituality or their relationship with "God".

 

They seem to reach those conclusions based on their interpretation of the Hebrew scriptures, and they reject the New Testament as being a valid continuation of their scriptures.

 

You have yet to demonstrate and prove that you know more about what their scriptures mean than they do.

 

According the OT, Jesus is not the way of the truth, rather he is a myth, just like every other god in history

 

"My world" is what the Bible tells me about Christ.

 

There are numerous bibles in the world. No proof that yours list represents the "true" divine revalation from your god.

 

At the time that the four gospel were written, there were competing books about Christ, which potray a different image of christ.

 

One cannot know which is speaking the truth and which is not. (And please don't refrain from using circular arguement)

 

You may have no problems accepting the writings of unknown men(who were not even witnesses), and the decision of the 50 men, (who had selfish motivation), but most of us do not.

 

Nor could you ever prove that your NT is actually the progressive revelation of the Jewish god.

 

All of the above you have taken on "faith" not facts. And I have stressed you numerous time, you have this faith on men who are telling about god.

 

Christ is also your Savior and died for your sins because of His love for you

 

The OT clearly mentions that there is no saviour besides Hebrew Tribal God(who is singular).

 

There is no OT proof that the messiah would known to be a saviour.

 

The alleged sacrifice of Jesus does not fulfill the OT laws, and is illegal.

 

The OT makes it clear who is going to die for your sins, and it's not Jesus.

 

1. I can tell you what Jesus is and what He was to do for us and how to know Him. Poeple choose not to follow that, it doesn't mean I stuffed God into a box, it means you can't into the box with Him, heh.

 

Once again their is no evidence that your "version" of God is actually the divine being that created the world. The Jews are fin living in the box with "God".

 

2. So Hell doesn't exist, huh?

It doesn't exist in the OT.

 

 

Hell/Heaven is just one of the various concept that the NT borrowed from Pagan mythologies, just like the worship of Sunday and celebration of christmas.

 

Besides do you actually believe that JC is gonna make unbeliever suffer for eternity. Do remember the following are unbelievers

 

1)Babies and non christian children

2)People who die under persecution(eg jews who died in the Nazi Concentration camp)

3)All my loved ones

 

The last one kind of undermines the reward of the eternal life. I don't know about you, I don't think I could be happy in heaven with Jesus if I see that my loved ones are suffering in hell. The only way I would be happy, if god manages to strip my emotions or alters with my memory

 

Oh btw, we have have two new christians who say the completely opposite of you

 

1)The KJV is the only accurate translation of god. Please address him here

 

2)That in the beginning we were made in the image of Jesus (not the Triune God/God the father you talked about).

Both of these christians believe in the same doctrine as you and are just as genuine as you are. Please demonstrate to us that two of you can come to an agreement in the name of christ. Otherwise I'll have to conclude that jesus promises about the leading it's believer to truth is fake.

[Anakin]

 

No, love shows through anyone willing to embrace and seek it.

 

Wrong, love is God and through Christ we can find that.

 

And how can anything done in the NATURE of God (which is love) be against God? Are there two different brands of love you can buy in the existential supermarket? Jesus Brand and the generic off brand? I dont understand why any act of kindness and love wouldn't matter to him. All the acts of hatred sure seem to, no matter who they're "for".

 

Love can only be done in the nature of God by having His nature, namely faith in Christ and the Holy Spirit of God. Without that love is not done in the nature of God.

 

Why would God concern Himself with works of people who do not even recognize Him?

What do you think love is?

Statements like these have me thinking this thread is going to degrade.

[Guest sub_zer0]

Does you God atleast recognises the works of the following christians

 

1)Mormons

2)JW

3)Catholics

4)Orthodox

5)Syrian Coptic

6)Armenian Bible

7)Ethiopic

 

Or are you gonna assert your god is only concerned with those christians who follow the protestant bible

 

I dunno, depends if they have a true heart for God or not.

 

The Jews don't seem to accept your theological whims or your god-man called "Jesus" as being very important to their spirituality or their relationship with "God".

 

They seem to reach those conclusions based on their interpretation of the Hebrew scriptures, and they reject the New Testament as being a valid continuation of their scriptures.

 

You have yet to demonstrate and prove that you know more about what their scriptures mean than they do.

 

According the OT, Jesus is not the way of the truth, rather he is a myth, just like every other god in history

 

They obviously reject Jesus likewise the NT so Christ is not God to them.

 

I don't need to prove anything about me knowing more. I read and believe in Jesus and the NT, That is the difference and that is how I know more than them, I guess you could say.

 

There are numerous bibles in the world. No proof that yours list represents the "true" divine revalation from your god.

 

At the time that the four gospel were written, there were competing books about Christ, which potray a different image of christ.

 

One cannot know which is speaking the truth and which is not. (And please don't refrain from using circular arguement)

 

You may have no problems accepting the writings of unknown men(who were not even witnesses), and the decision of the 50 men, (who had selfish motivation), but most of us do not.

 

Nor could you ever prove that your NT is actually the progressive revelation of the Jewish god.

 

All of the above you have taken on "faith" not facts. And I have stressed you numerous time, you have this faith on men who are telling about god.

 

There is only one Holy Bible. All that mine proves as being true is that it attests the truth, Jesus.

 

The OT clearly mentions that there is no saviour besides Hebrew Tribal God(who is singular).

 

There is no OT proof that the messiah would known to be a saviour.

 

The alleged sacrifice of Jesus does not fulfill the OT laws, and is illegal.

 

The OT makes it clear who is going to die for your sins, and it's not Jesus.

 

Not gonna have this conversation again...

 

Besides do you actually believe that JC is gonna make unbeliever suffer for eternity. Do remember the following are unbelievers

 

1)Babies and non christian children

2)People who die under persecution(eg jews who died in the Nazi Concentration camp)

3)All my loved ones

 

The last one kind of undermines the reward of the eternal life. I don't know about you, I don't think I could be happy in heaven with Jesus if I see that my loved ones are suffering in hell. The only way I would be happy, if god manages to strip my emotions or alters with my memory

 

1. If they can't make the choice for themselve they are spared.

2. How is it because people were persecuted they are unbelievers?

3. You might want to let your loved ones know the mistake they are making not accepting Christ as they will be forever away from Him and not able to accept Him once they die.

 

Oh btw, we have have two new christians who say the completely opposite of you

 

1)The KJV is the only accurate translation of god. Please address him here

 

2)That in the beginning we were made in the image of Jesus (not the Triune God/God the father you talked about).

Both of these christians believe in the same doctrine as you and are just as genuine as you are. Please demonstrate to us that two of you can come to an agreement in the name of christ. Otherwise I'll have to conclude that jesus promises about the leading it's believer to truth is fake.

 

I don't need to prove anything to you. You are forgetting that Jesus came to divide, He wants us to take sides to discuss, to debate and the like.

 

1. The KJV is a fine Bible, but to say that it is the only accurate one, is bogus. New manuscripts have been found that were not even considered for the KJV. And in case you didn't know I never said the NASB is the most accurate translation of God. I said it is the most literal rendering of the newest available texts we have today.

 

2. Prove that through Scripture.

[Guest sub_zer0]

Statements like these have me thinking this thread is going to degrade.

 

I am saying that the only way love is done through the nature of God is through accepting God.

 

I am saying that God cannot recognize your works of love without you recognizing Him first.

 

What is so wrong with that?

 

AM you are one patient dude. I hope Zero returns the sincerity you and others have extended

to him.

 

Zero, earlier you stated that we have all spoken of you terribly. If you're thinking of the

"One Verse" thread also I'd agree somewhat. But in this thread I don't see it. Or maybe

I just missed it. In my earlier post in this thread, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.

I honestly thought I saw conflict in you. Your heart saying one thing but your mind saying

another. Perhaps I was wrong.

 

I was talking earlier, so we agree.

 

You may have been wrong, I don't remember and don't wanna take the time to look through em' all, ;p.

[Eponymic]

Let's try this again. God is love. God shows His love through Christ. So Christ is a symbol of not only love, but God's love for us!

 

Right, and God's love is conditional love because there's no getting around the fact that he qualifies his love by offering you the choice between eternal damnation & heaven.

 

No, love is not a replacment for God as you are trying to put it. It is if one has God, one has love.

 

God has unconditional love for all, but through that love He gives us choice to accept Him or not.

 

UN-conditional. Meaning NO conditions.

 

Exactly how does OBEY ME or GO TO HELL = Unconditional.

 

Telling one that they HAVE to follow JESUS to be validated is a condition. If God was truly unconditional, he'd accept all positive acts, not caring about sect or style.

 

The love that Christ has is exclusive as that love is God, or Himself. Love is universal but love produced by faith in Christ, sadly is not.

 

His love is exclusive, in other words- CONDITIONAL

Bing!!!

 

Why would God concern Himself with works of people who do not even recognize Him?

What do you think love is?

 

He wouldn't, because your God's love is conditional.

Love is certainly not killing all the first born kids of Egypt.

Love is certainly not advocating incest.

Love is certainly not advocating inequality between men & women, hatred of homosexuals, and certainly not the advocating of slavery.

 

Just a few things that your God validates.

 

There is only one Holy Bible. All that mine proves as being true is that it attests the truth, Jesus.

 

And if your Holy Bible has an OT attached to it, then you can't just walk all over it & discount it like it doesn't exist. Because if all you were supposed to believe in was the NT, then the OT wouldn't be a part of the Bible at all would it.

[Guest sub_zer0]

Right, and God's love is conditional love because there's no getting around the fact that he qualifies his love by offering you the choice between eternal damnation & heaven.

 

We created the conditions by not following His will to begin with remember.

 

UN-conditional. Meaning NO conditions.

 

Exactly how does OBEY ME or GO TO HELL = Unconditional.

 

Telling one that they HAVE to follow JESUS to be validated is a condition. If God was truly unconditional, he'd accept all positive acts, not caring about sect or style.

 

It is either do Gods will or your own. What is so wrong with that? I mean there would be no need for hell if we could just do God's will but He gave us free will to choose to do that. That is love.

 

He wouldn't, because your God's love is conditional.

Love is certainly not killing all the first born kids of Egypt.

Love is certainly not advocating incest.

Love is certainly not advocating inequality between men & women, hatred of homosexuals, and certainly not the advocating of slavery.

 

Just a few things that your God validates.

 

Love is certainly allowing those kids not at the age of accountability to be with the Lord free from this horrible earth and people, who created death through sinning.

 

God never advocates incest.

 

Indeed, love is not any of that.

 

And just how does my God validate those?

 

And if your Holy Bible has an OT attached to it, then you can't just walk all over it & discount it like it doesn't exist. Because if all you were supposed to believe in was the NT, then the OT wouldn't be a part of the Bible at all would it.

 

No it wouldn't very good. But if you did some study on the purpose of the OT for a Christian you would find that it is to be wisdom for us unto salvation in Christ.

[Eponymic]

We created the conditions by not following His will to begin with remember.

 

No, he created the conditions because from the beginning he had the condition of FOLLOWING HIS WILL. That's still a condition. You just can't get around it, we didn't start it, he did. According to your book (which I think is not holy anyway, but to prove appoint I'm talking about this).

 

It is either do Gods will or your own. What is so wrong with that? I mean there would be no need for hell if we could just do God's will but He gave us free will to choose to do that. That is love.

 

It's not free will, if by choosing to use the will HE gave you, HE will punish you. That's like giving a kid a toy & telling him he can't use it. That's not loving, it's still conditional because it's not giving a person a real choice when you're saying 'do what you want, and go to hell, or follow me, and go to heaven.'

 

That's not a choice, it's more akin to blackmail. 'Hey you can do what you want, but if you do, you're gonna pay. Just do what I want, and everything will be okay.'

 

Love is certainly allowing those kids not at the age of accountability to be with the Lord free from this horrible earth and people, who created death through sinning.

 

God never advocates incest.

 

Indeed, love is not any of that.

 

And just how does my God validate those?

 

Well, because, slavery, anti-homosexual, bias against women, & the murdering of children, and even incest approval (Lot), are all in the Bible and advocated by God. If you don't know where, that's pretty telling there brother. I'm a non-believer and I know many passages where God talks about these things.

 

 

No it wouldn't very good. But if you did some study on the purpose of the OT for a Christian you would find that it is to be wisdom for us unto salvation in Christ.

 

If it's just a wisdom tool, and not meant to be studies as gospel, then why would you keep the two attached. There's plenty of other books that are meant for Biblical wisdom that aren't attached.

[Guest sub_zer0]

No, he created the conditions because from the beginning he had the condition of FOLLOWING HIS WILL. That's still a condition. You just can't get around it, we didn't start it, he did. According to your book (which I think is not holy anyway, but to prove appoint I'm talking about this).

 

Oh, so because He gave us free will to follow Him or not it is a condition? Perhaps He should of just made you worship Him all along.

 

It is either do Gods will or your own. What is so wrong with that? I mean there would be no need for hell if we could just do God's will but He gave us free will to choose to do that. That is love.

 

It's not free will, if by choosing to use the will HE gave you, HE will punish you. That's like giving a kid a toy & telling him he can't use it. That's not loving, it's still conditional because it's not giving a person a real choice when you're saying 'do what you want, and go to hell, or follow me, and go to heaven.'

 

That's not a choice, it's more akin to blackmail. 'Hey you can do what you want, but if you do, you're gonna pay. Just do what I want, and everything will be okay.'

 

That is a choice and that is the reality of it. Gods will is good, our will is bad. Gods will is Heaven and being with Him, our will (anything but doing Gods will) is hell and not being with Him. Hell is the absence of God.

 

Love is certainly allowing those kids not at the age of accountability to be with the Lord free from this horrible earth and people, who created death through sinning.

 

God never advocates incest.

 

Indeed, love is not any of that.

 

And just how does my God validate those?

 

Well, because, slavery, anti-homosexual, bias against women, & the murdering of children, and even incest approval (Lot), are all in the Bible and advocated by God. If you don't know where, that's pretty telling there brother. I'm a non-believer and I know many passages where God talks about these things.

 

The fact that you do not see the difference between God and a person doing and advocating something is telling as well.

 

I know many passages when the things spoken about are in reference to a indicidual or groups of people when it speaks of those things that you say God advocates. I also see tons of passages deatiling what God really is and you don't have to search for it through other peoples actions that are spoken about in the Bible. It is rather explicit when speaking about God in the Bible.

 

No it wouldn't very good. But if you did some study on the purpose of the OT for a Christian you would find that it is to be wisdom for us unto salvation in Christ.

 

If it's just a wisdom tool, and not meant to be studies as gospel, then why would you keep the two attached. There's plenty of other books that are meant for Biblical wisdom that aren't attached.

 

You didn't grasp what I said, I guess. Lemme try again.

 

The Old Testament conceals what is revealed in the New Testament. There are many, many reasons for the OT. It is not just a wisdom tool, lol, but it is to make one wise unto salvation in Christ.

[Alice]

Hi Sub,

 

the following points and questions stand out to me,

 

 

Christ pointed the way, which is Himself, so Christ is the way as He says He is.

 

No, love is not a replacement for God as you are trying to put it. It is if one has God, one has love.

 

God has unconditional love for all, but through that love He gives us choice to accept Him or not.

 

How can one love without God? You say that if one has love, they have God. I am saying that if one has God they love because God is love.

 

I never said that Christ is the first to promote love. Indeed God has been around forever.

 

Am I correct in thinking that you think one can only have a relationship with God-as-Sub-understands-him through a relationship with Christ? Am I correct in thinking that you are comfortable with the idea that God-as-Sub-understands-him can be defined as 'God is love'?

 

One minute you appear to accept that Love is universal - the next that it is exclusive to a relationship with Christ. Which is it Sub?

 

 

 

No, love shows through anyone willing to embrace and seek it.

 

Wrong, love is God and through Christ we can find that.

 

How do you explain the fact that without Christ - many people find Love?

 

 

The love that Christ has is exclusive as that love is God, or Himself. Love is universal but love produced by faith in Christ, sadly is not....

 

Love can only be done in the nature of God by having His nature, namely faith in Christ and the Holy Spirit of God. Without that love is not done in the nature of God.

 

Why would God concern Himself with works of people who do not even recognize Him?

 

My questions - 'which is it' and 'how do you explain' apply here as well

 

 

 

 

I am saying that the only way love is done through the nature of God is through accepting God.

 

I am saying that God cannot recognize your works of love without you recognizing Him first.

 

What is so wrong with that?

 

It is either do Gods will or your own. What is so wrong with that? I mean there would be no need for hell if we could just do God's will but He gave us free will to choose to do that. That is love.

 

Oh, so because He gave us free will to follow Him or not it is a condition? Perhaps He should of just made you worship Him all along.

 

The fact that you do not see the difference between God and a person doing and advocating something is telling as well.

 

Please explain the loving purpose of hell ... I mean what is the 'point' of a literal hell? Would you have accepted endless eternal punishment from a parent if your 'crime' was to 'not love them in the style demanded'? Would you inflict this on a child of yours? Would you even burn a truculent child for a couple of seconds? Would you even singe one even slightly with a hot poker - let alone 'cast' them into a lake of fire? Why is it one rule for God and one rule for mankind?

 

Please tell me - in your heart of hearts, does the fact that you believe God says 'those who do not submit to my will will be sent to a place of eternal torture' - does it 'feel' loving to you?

[SkepticOfBible]

Does you God atleast recognises the works of the following christians

 

1)Mormons

2)JW

3)Catholics

4)Orthodox

5)Syrian Coptic

6)Armenian Bible

7)Ethiopic

 

Or are you gonna assert your god is only concerned with those christians who follow the protestant bibleI dunno, depends if they have a true heart for God or not.

 

I see, so right it's not about having the right faith and doing good works. It's just about believing in a man named christ.

 

Most christians says that pluralism is a wrong stance, which I agree. However the same christians don't have a problem in "christian" pluralism.

 

Anyways, maybe I missed your stance on this, but is it possible to lose your salvation after you repent of sin, ie lets say a christian goes ahead and steals a car for XYZ reasons, will this christian lose his salvation?And will he regain it once he repents of it?

 

They obviously reject Jesus likewise the NT so Christ is not God to them.

 

Didn't you wanted to know why?That is first thing that I wanted to know when I started my research in christianity. If the NT is supposedly made for the Jews, then why is they reject it?(And please don't point me to the GotQuestion.org site. I have been there, and their answer is lame

 

I don't need to prove anything about me knowing more. I read and believe in Jesus and the NT, That is the difference and that is how I know more than them, I guess you could say.

 

Then the question is do the Jews have a relationship with "God"?And whatever happened to the Isrealites before Jesus?Was their relationship invalid

 

After Jesus came, did the "God" suddenly break off his relationship with his people, and then wanted to start a relationship with a new one(Gentiles)

There are numerous bibles in the world. No proof that yours list represents the "true" divine revalation from your god.

Nor could you ever prove that your NT is actually the progressive revelation of the Jewish god.

 

All of the above you have taken on "faith" not facts. And I have stressed you numerous time, you have this faith on men who are telling about god.

 

There is only one Holy Bible. All that mine proves as being true is that it attests the truth, Jesus.

Did you just notice the circular reason, "the bible is true because it is true.".

 

Every christians(or religious person) can make the same claim for their canon(religious scripture).

 

And it doesn't prove anything. it is a mere assertion.

 

The OT clearly mentions that there is no saviour besides Hebrew Tribal God(who is singular).

 

There is no OT proof that the messiah would known to be a saviour.

 

The alleged sacrifice of Jesus does not fulfill the OT laws, and is illegal.

 

The OT makes it clear who is going to die for your sins, and it's not Jesus.

 

Not gonna have this conversation again...

 

Fair enough, but it was you who made an assertion

Hell is the absence of God.

 

If God is everywhere then he is also in hell.

 

The bible clearly says that Jesus would oversee the torture of the unbelievers.

 

Rev 9:10-11(NASB)

10he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.

 

11"And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever;they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."

 

Don't try to sanitise hell by saying it is absense of god.

 

Hell is a place of eternal torture(where there will wailing and gnashing of teeth ), as designed by Jesus.

 

Babies and non christian children

1. If they can't make the choice for themselve they are spared.

 

The age of accountabilty is a unbiblical doctrine. There is not single scripture which supports it.

 

Jesus had no problem ordering the killing and directly being involved in the killing of children in the OT. (Christians says that this is the judgemental part of God). So why should it be different in the afterlife?

 

Christians say that even if a person doesn't commit a single sin, they will goto to hell for the "original sin".

 

If children were exempt from sinning/hell until a certain age, that would imply that children obtain an advantage over adults.

 

If, as many you asserted, children under a certain age get a free pass directly to heaven if they die, it would be practical for parents to kill their children before they reach a certain age, before they can make a certian choice and reject Jesus as their savior and Lord.

 

It would be a great advantage to die as a child and be assured of heaven rather than reach a certain age and possibly endanger your salvation by committing a sin of some type.

 

You should be praising the doctor who perform abortions, cause they are sending all those millions of babies to heaven.

 

The age of accountability clause is essentially subterfuge on the part of Christians who promote it.

 

The New Testament doesn't leave room for any person, no matter how old they are, to be exempt from going through Jesus to reach God the Father and avoid his wrath.

 

John 14:6

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

 

John 3:36

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

 

These verses, like so many others in the Bible, are absolutist in nature. They do not say that some people are exempt from the rules

 

And missionary are messing the chances of people going to heaven, by giving them a choice?No choice = heavens

 

2. How is it because people were persecuted they are unbelievers?

Perhaps I did not make my question clear.

 

Essentially your Christ is going to make unbelievers, who died under persecution, suffer for eternity.

 

So in this life they had a sucky life, and the same goes in the afterlife.

 

A good example would be the 6 million Jews who died under Nazis. Right now according to your theology they are right suffering in hell because of their unbelief in christ.

 

How exactly is hell different than those concentration camp, one can only imagine?

 

3. You might want to let your loved ones know the mistake they are making not accepting Christ as they will be forever away from Him and not able to accept Him once they die.

 

Thank you for your kind answer. Another christian TxViper responded by saying "Worry about yourself and not of others"

 

Well what about the loved ones who are dead?My loving Grandparents dies a staunch Hindus, do you expect me to believe that they are suffering in hell?

 

And tell me how many of loved ones have you convinced of christ?(off course they might be all christians then this question is irrelevant)

 

But can you be truly happy in heaven if your loved ones are suffering in hell for eternity. Will you not hear their torments and be upset. Most people cannot even see or hear torment of a animals for more than 5 minutes, yet I am to believe I would be able to withstand the cries of my loved one for eternity.

 

Frankly I don't see difference in the way the Christ treats unbelievers and the way Allah treats unbelievers in the Afterlife.

 

Either ways there is no way of knowing which is true without me fooling myself.

 

So the way I see it, I might be going to hell, only I don't know whether I am going to a Islamic one or a christian one?

 

I don't need to prove anything to you. You are forgetting that Jesus came to divide, He wants us to take sides to discuss, to debate and the like.

 

Most christians have told me that the division he is talking about was amongst unbelievers and believers. I guess the HS is telling you different.

 

As I mentioned before, according to Jesus, unity amongst his believer was exactly the sign that would have proved his genuineness.

 

Honestly do you REAAALLLYYYY think that the body of christ is united? It was not even united during the period of Paul

 

Exactly my question to you, how can one love without God?

 

I am not sure what you are asking here. Are you saying that true love is impossible without God?

 

You also said love is patience, so logically so should be god. But you god is not.

From Salvation: What's the Big Hurry?

 

If we are truly eternal beings, and God is an eternal God, then we have an eternity to get to understand Him, and he has an eternity to teach us. So what's the big hurry? Why must we figure it all out in the first few moments of our existence? What's a few more years in eternity? Or a few billion? And what's the big deal about doing it all in this lifetime? Our souls are the things that are at stake here, and according to Christians, souls live on, and death is a mere shedding of the mortal body. I remember a preacher once saying that Hell was so horrible, that if unbelievers could just get a glimpse of it, they would all convert immediately. Well, wouldn't the Gospel message be much more compelling in the afterlife, where we could actually visit this Hell? One of the main reasons people don't become Christians is that they simply don't buy it. But in the afterlife, face to face with Jesus and Satan and Heaven and Hell and all that, the whole thing becomes a lot more convincing. Why not offer salvation then?

 

1. The KJV is a fine Bible, but to say that it is the only accurate one, is bogus. New manuscripts have been found that were not even considered for the KJV. And in case you didn't know .

 

Wow if it is bogus claim, then why do christians keep promoting it (like Kent Hovind and ICR) and keep on confusing non-believers about it.

 

I never said the NASB is the most accurate translation of God. I said it is the most literal rendering of the newest available texts we have today

 

And I pointed out the error regarding that.

 

But still why can't your god inspire complete accurate translation of his "word"?

 

You probably know how many "false" doctrine can be formed through faulty doctrine and it will certainly relieve a believers atleast that what they are following is word of god.

 

Btw that claim was made here Please tell him not to make a bogus claim in the name of Jesus.

 

2. Prove that through Scripture.

 

Err you'll have to talk to this christians named red_neck here(Post 640)

 

See this is a good example where the HS is either telling you three different things

 

Or in I would like to say that you are both interpretating according to your theological preferences

 

Oh FYI, I heard a sermon where this preacher was claiming that he healed people of Leprosy, blindness, disabilities, and even AIDS.

[Open_Minded]

No, love is not a replacment for God as you are trying to put it. It is if one has God, one has love.

 

Well, I have love so I must have God.

 

 

You ... go .... girl

 

BTW... I like how your answer to Any Gods? reflects your above statement.

 

Sub_Zer0

 

Another way to look at this is Christ is the Alpha and Omega ... the Word (WISDOM of God/LOVE) made Flesh ... the physical manifestation of Sacred Love/WISDOM.

 

The path is....

 

God is LOVE

Christ is the WORD made Flesh (WORD refers to LOGOS or WISDOM of God)

Christ is ALSO the Alpha and Omega

So .... Christ can be seen as ...

 

Infinite (Alpha and Omega) Manifested or Physical expression of LOVE/WISDOM

 

If this is so .... if Christ IS the Alpha and Omega it would be IMPOSSIBLE to have existence outside of Christ - the physical manifestion of Sacred WISDOM/LOVE.

 

Sub .... Sacred LOVE/WISDOM is knit into the very core of existence. We live and move and have our being in IT (sacred WISDOM/LOVE). We could no more escape this WISDOM/LOVE than we could escape atomic matter.

 

Serene is right ... she has LOVE and WISDOM ... she has all she needs. And what she calls it .. has nothing to do with her "salvation".

[Anakin]

Zero,

"Why would God concern Himself with works of people who do not even recognize Him?"

 

In other words, your god doesn't care about our concepts of love so you don't either.

 

"What do you think love is?"

 

How condesending. So the assumption is that since we don't believe in your god

then we cannot know what love is. I may just be a man, but one thing is certain.

If I displayed your god's version of love, I'd be in prison.

 

"You may have been wrong, I don't remember and don't wanna take the time

to look through em' all, ;p."

 

I certainly understand that. But this displays an attitude of not caring what people

here have to say.

 

Plus you're starting the free will junk again. That was discussed in the "One Verse"

thread. You didn't listen there and you won't listen here. Not worth discussing again.

I don't think you care what we think. It's your way or the highway.

I guess you're here to troll again.

[Alice]

Sub,

 

some more thoughts about love ...

 

As a christian I would often claim to love people. I believed I was commanded to love people - not just my friends and family ... but my neighbours, strangers, my enemies even ... eveyone.

 

However much I would tell myself that I 'loved' others - there was a difference between my 'claims of love' and those that I actually, genuinely loved. There is a difference between 'authentic' heartfelt love and claims of love that do not truly touch the heart or spirit.

 

I know that when I truly love someone else - this is a 'spiritual' experience.

 

Almost everything that my children do and everthing that they 'are' - produces a spiritual response in my being. Things that other people might not think are 'lovely' are beautiful to me. My older children no longer make all the life choices I would choose for them - but they have free will. Should they ever make a 'mistake' - will I announce that they deserve their punishment and add some eternal torment of my own - or because I love them will I offer to do whatever I can to allieviate their difficulties? Will I love them less and implement my special additional torment plan, if they turn down the offer of help - or will I continue to love them and accept them for who they are?

 

I truly believe that deep in the heart or spirit of the majority of people - is a universal experience and understanding of love*. Tuning in to this capacity - I think most people, when they honestly question - will see that there is a difference between authentic love and the 'love' defined by fundamentalist christianity. Sub - have you ever felt this difference?

 

* - I think there are some people for whom the capacity to understand and give or recieve love - has been significantly impaired - various causes.

[Alice]

 

My wisdom was also impacted greatly by allowing myself to sit back and "listen" to what you, O-Minded, Alice, Amanda, Antlerman and NBBTL had to say and offer. I'm thankful that I stuck around and was able to learn a side that I've never known before. It's my choice to view things in this new light and not all will agree, but thats okay, it doesn't really matter.

 

Thats a really nice thing to say I feel really priviledged to be part of these conversations and the synergy that has been created.

[white_raven23]

God never advocates incest.

 

Oh?

 

Aparantly you are really good at adding things to the bible to justify it, despite there existing NO verses to support your assumption.

 

Tell me, how do you go from having TWO people PERIOD to having enough people to sustain a population.....WITHOUT incest occurring?

 

Who did Cain and Abel marry? Had to be their own sisters.

 

THAT'S called incest!

 

Don't go inventing more people that aren't verified by the bible either.

 

And God DOES advocate it by NOT punishing it.....something he's clearly NOT hesitent about doing ACCORDING to YOUR STUPID BIBLE.

 

He doesn't punish Lot's daughters for it. So God is okay with it there too.

 

You go from talking as though god cares about every little thing we do, to god just going "Eh...that's humans for ya" and not really being concerned at all.

 

Either you really need to recognize your view of one god is badly contradictory......or you believe in two seperate gods here!

[Ziggy]

Excellant point Alice. I need to recognize that in myself to even aside from Christianity so that I don't turn my hopes of what I've learned into a dogma that everyone "must" agree with. I've got a LONG way to go before I can have that spiritual or whatever it's called type of feel good for those outside my comfort zone...however, my desire to learn how is there. I see the universal message and can talk love and I do have quite a time to go.

 

Serene I thought this was a good honest post.

Its not easy just to feel love ..but to be looking for it within is all you can do and you are on the right path.

I struggle with it as well at times but feel Ok because i am heading/searching in the right direction without the 'dark' side of Christianity lurking in the background.

If I admitted to a lack of love as a christian then the feelings became really negative and dark because then God has forsaken me or the devil must be in control etc which is just plain madness. I mean actual madness!

 

This threads theme is fantastic - To know that love is there for all and not just through a reliance on an exclusive faith. Everybody has an equal chance of love as long as they are willing to search.. quite and eye opener. Dare i be so dramatic to say that i now feel like there is now a real chance for spiritual human unity - irrespective of religion / creed / culture? We do not have to be be just negative in pointing out all the flaws in religion .. but can offer something positive and unifying Gee - the possibilities!!

[Antlerman]

(I have some catching up to do.... )

 

Sub, do you see any of the similarities between bible literal christianity and the pharisees of Jesus' day?

Chrisitianity views the kingdom of Heaven as something that is being built-up right here and now through the good news that is the Gospel of Christ. So now, I fail to see how I am like the Pharisee's in connection with the view of Christianity and the kingdom of Heaven.

The Pharisees were literalists and strict legalists (who were historically only really prominent in the region and time where Matthew wrote his particular Gospel). The connection I would make between your style of strict interpretation and the Pharisees that Matthew used the Jesus character in his Gospel to attack, is that the letter of law kills the spirit of the Law. “White washed sepultures, full of dead men’s bones,” etc. Strictly religious, no spirituality despite “believing the ways of God.” Today's Fundamentalists are the Pharisees of Mathew’s day - point blank .

George Bush is a symbol of the free world. George Bush is a real person. Sub, you do not understand language here. A rose is a symbol of love. A gold ring is a symbol of marriage. Christ is a symbol of love. Etc. So yes, Christ is a symbol, and whether he was god, man, or myth is irrelevant to the role he plays as a symbol of human aspirations. It is in this context I speak at all times when I say symbol.

Jesus does indeed play a role as a symbol of human aspirations, but what is the point of living to up to that when you don't even believe what Christ called Himself? It is not irrelevant. It means nothing if you do not think of Him as He called Himself, the Son of God and the way, the truth and the life.

Let's try this again. God is love. God shows His love through Christ. So Christ is a symbol of not only love, but God's love for us!

It means nothing to you. Let me clarify, and repeat for you what I’m sure you’ve heard going on several thousand times by now: No two Christians believe the same thing about God. With that fact in mind, assigning specific meanings to the symbol of Christ is in fact irrelevant to anyone outside you. I see Christ as a created personality that symbolizes many positive things, things that are reflective of the author’s views of spiritual insights. Some of those views have meaning to me; others are reflective of the culture of the day, various other contemporary philosophies that they were trying to address through the character of Jesus, etc. You choose from those things what is meaningful to you. Episcopalians choose what is meaningful to them, Lutherans the same, Baptists the same, and… me the same.

 

The real pertinent question is this: Are the things that I or anyone else takes Christ to symbolize, positive, healthy things whose fruits bear life and love? If not, then I would see this as not valuing Christ as a positive symbol.

 

The reason for this thread is not to dispute or challenge how you believe about God or Christ, or any other thing from the Bible. It’s about the fruits that come as a result of those beliefs. Are they healthy? Does it make you more connected with life and all people around you, or does it isolate you and keep you from embracing the genuine love that is the world everywhere around you? When I hear you seeming to gloss over the magnitude of the Love that exists in world, by saying “It’s meaningful to me, but Christ doesn’t value it because it’s not about him” (in so many words), I’m really not hearing a heart that experiences love in this world. That is why I find these sorts of dogmatic beliefs so disheartening. I hate to see any human disconnected from the world because of these inflexible views on something so unspecific, as is borne out by the 30,000 different Christian sects surrounding it. That phenomenon fits within my framework of understanding easily, whereas it betrays the assumed perfection of yours.

[NorthenSun]

Hi Sub,

Please explain the loving purpose of hell ... I mean what is the 'point' of a literal hell?

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Schadenfreude is a German term meaning "pleasure taken from someone else's misfortune".

 

Surely, Hell is one of God's finer creations; he must take great delight in showing it off to others, eternally.

.

[Eponymic]

Oh, so because He gave us free will to follow Him or not it is a condition? Perhaps He should of just made you worship Him all along.

 

YES!!! If this God is UNWILLING to let us live happily & not be subject to his HELL once you die, then YES, he should never have GIVEN US the will to do what we want in the first place. Because either way, according to your God, we're still subject to going to hell. So how the heck can you really be free if being free to choose mean choosing a hell? I mean really!

 

That is a choice and that is the reality of it. Gods will is good, our will is bad. Gods will is Heaven and being with Him, our will (anything but doing Gods will) is hell and not being with Him. Hell is the absence of God.

 

So.. WHY, if god is so loving & good, would he create a being with BAD WILL? He CREATED US, right? So he created the evil within us too. Why? How is that loving, to create us with this inherit opposition? How is it loving to create us with the desire to disobey him, or simply to do deeds than are evil (according to him)? Where is the love in making a create and making them bad? That's the Good will of God?

 

Th

e fact that you do not see the difference between God and a person doing and advocating something is telling as well.

 

I know many passages when the things spoken about are in reference to a indicidual or groups of people when it speaks of those things that you say God advocates. I also see tons of passages deatiling what God really is and you don't have to search for it through other peoples actions that are spoken about in the Bible. It is rather explicit when speaking about God in the Bible.

 

Right, and God's actions (in the Bible) speak even louder than his words. That's what I'm mostly talking about.

 

 

The Old Testament conceals what is revealed in the New Testament. There are many, many reasons for the OT. It is not just a wisdom tool, lol, but it is to make one wise unto salvation in Christ.

 

I think I'm going to drop this because it's getting away from my main points above.

 

The fact is, within your own statements you've started contradicting yourself, thereby weakening your position.

 

You said, "God has unconditional love for all, but through that love He gives us choice to accept Him or not."

 

Then later you said, "We created the conditions by not following His will to begin with remember."

 

Suddenly you admit there are conditions. You can't have both. It's one or the other, and after admitting there are conditions, you can't just suddenly say that God's love in unconditional anymore. We know it isn't, and proven it too.

 

The big thing here is I'm just trying to show you the flaw in your argument.

 

Frankly, if you need to believe in God to be a stable, loving human being. So be it!

 

But do it with the recognization of what you're really saying & following, not a diluted/personalized version of what God is. A version you've justified & converted to fit your particular style of living.

[Antlerman]

"My world" is what the Bible tells me about Christ.

 

There are numerous bibles in the world. No proof that yours list represents the "true" divine revalation from your god.

 

At the time that the four gospel were written, there were competing books about Christ, which potray a different image of christ.

 

(etc......)

No offense, but easy there..... this thread is not about engaging in arguments about the correctness of Sub's interpretations of the Bible. I made that clear in the rules in post #1. I accept that Sub believes what he says, and he has his reasons for that. His proving the correctness of his beliefs is for another thread - like in the Lion's Den under "One verse at time". This is a discussion about spirituality in the life of a fundamentalist, not bible arguments about verses and theology.

 

It's too easy for a thread to become completely consumed by those sorts of arguments. I'm just trying to keep this thread focused relatively on target.

 

Thanks

 

BTW, New Rule Can we try to keep posts under 1000 words in this discussion?? I counted one that was well over 2000. That's 6 pages long on 8.5 x 11 sheets of paper! That's a dissertation! (I know I can be a little too wordy too a lot of the time)

[Open_Minded]

Edit: My wisdom was also impacted greatly by allowing myself to sit back and "listen" to what you, O-Minded, Alice, Amanda, Antlerman and NBBTL had to say and offer. I'm thankful that I stuck around and was able to learn a side that I've never known before. It's my choice to view things in this new light and not all will agree, but thats okay, it doesn't really matter.

 

Thank you Serene ... for the kind words.

 

This discussion has been educational for me as well ... once again I'm seeing a whole new world.

 

All you people are great.