I seriously don't have time to get into what's wrong with every single sentence you just wrote, but they don't jive with what makes me tick.
I was a post-atheist, progressive, Taoist, channelling, divining, manifesting OOB junky and was delivered in one day. With no pressure from anyone, just a crack in the door when I let Jesus in. I dropped every worthless thing at his feet, and he changed my heart for the better that day, thank God. I had been a wreck. That trash was destroying me, and you know what led me to it all? Indiscriminate curiosity and that drive to see behind the veil. God has an answer to that. The enemy answers it with a million ego-inflating lies, and it leads to ruin. That's my truth. If I said differently, I'd be lying, pretending, trying to fit in. I can't do that.
a) Jesus was a He, and most fathers are.
b) I'll talk about him in the way that he revealed himself. Sorry, no cheating.
c) I'm claiming matter of factly that I am utterly convinced of what God has done, and you'd need a pretty whacked conspiracy theory or two to explain away any one case. Of course that isn't going to convince you. It's foolishness.
EDIT: Also, goodnight.
Topic: Religious beliefs on bitcoin - page 20. (Read 22413 times)
A)Calling your god a 'He' is dumb
B)Talking about your god in a way that requires the reader to make a leap of faith to even finish reading one of your premises is dumb.
C)Claiming matter of factly that your god did this, does that, ect is dumb.
These things are dumb because you really know, deep down, the only reason you talk like that is to fit in.
Whether you were raised by enthusiastic consumers of churching or found that later in life it was easier just to play along until you internalized the motions, you know deep down that youre faking it and being dumb.
Everyone else can tell, and suspects that the act is only there to cover up some missing depth or longing for substantial meaning.
Ive done this debate before. The reasonable people always get sick of the neurosis and leave, losing. Religion must not be based in simply refering someone to a vastly overquoted book. We must think for ourselves.
Lots of folks still have faith in the obsolete lie that is the dollar. IN GOD WE TRUST. NOPE.
I left that lie a long time ago as well.
My religion requires that I be sincere, enflamed in prayer, and unforgiving of the sort of monocultural, white supremacist, patriarchical garbage that passes as religious thought.
B)Talking about your god in a way that requires the reader to make a leap of faith to even finish reading one of your premises is dumb.
C)Claiming matter of factly that your god did this, does that, ect is dumb.
These things are dumb because you really know, deep down, the only reason you talk like that is to fit in.
Whether you were raised by enthusiastic consumers of churching or found that later in life it was easier just to play along until you internalized the motions, you know deep down that youre faking it and being dumb.
Everyone else can tell, and suspects that the act is only there to cover up some missing depth or longing for substantial meaning.
Ive done this debate before. The reasonable people always get sick of the neurosis and leave, losing. Religion must not be based in simply refering someone to a vastly overquoted book. We must think for ourselves.
Lots of folks still have faith in the obsolete lie that is the dollar. IN GOD WE TRUST. NOPE.
I left that lie a long time ago as well.
My religion requires that I be sincere, enflamed in prayer, and unforgiving of the sort of monocultural, white supremacist, patriarchical garbage that passes as religious thought.
...
Slow mo youtube videos are sacred to me. Planting seeds is sacred.
Planting seeds is pretty special.Slow mo youtube videos are sacred to me. Planting seeds is sacred.
If youre going to insist that all we can do is miscommunicate, why even acknowledge me as a thinking person? Why not just dismiss and ignore me?
I hope you don't think that was my point. You certainly can't say I've ignored you
Perhaps you're even too sharp for me. Frankly, I'm exhausted.
If your backwards relugious dogma isnt compatible, and prevents you from even interfacing with new ideas, you must do away with it.
Oh goodness, no. Even the premise is off, there. I've been around the block, I'd never go back, and I've yet to hear a new idea here.
If I'm dogmatic, it's because I'm convinced. If I'm religious, it's a byproduct of that.
Who is predisposed here? You, locked into your narrow single book, or me, criticizing you for it?
Lest we get into a game of verbal battleship citing gnostic texts and satanic bibles that each of us may or may not have read, I'm happy to just say "No, thanks."
Can it be done?
You said it yourself, you are predisposed to that conclusion in my case, because I will not validate your mundane concept of deity.
"My satanism redefines deity into something so radically mundane as to render sacredness itself common. Of course, I maintain that this redefinition is needed for any valid discussion of god to be more than a creepy, overmedicated set of empty quotes and salesmanship of snipehunting gear."
If nothing can ever possibly be sacred to you, then we can only miscommunicate. Let it be.
MORE:
Slow mo youtube videos are sacred to me. Planting seeds is sacred.You said it yourself, you are predisposed to that conclusion in my case, because I will not validate your mundane concept of deity.
"My satanism redefines deity into something so radically mundane as to render sacredness itself common. Of course, I maintain that this redefinition is needed for any valid discussion of god to be more than a creepy, overmedicated set of empty quotes and salesmanship of snipehunting gear."
If nothing can ever possibly be sacred to you, then we can only miscommunicate. Let it be.
Quote
[1] Therefore, since through God's mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart. [2] Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God. [3] And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. [4] The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. [5] For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. - 2Cr 4:1-5 NIV
MORE:
Quote
[41] "I do not accept glory from human beings, [42] but I know you. I know that you do not have the love of God in your hearts. [43] I have come in my Father's name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. [44] How can you believe since you accept glory from one another but do not seek the glory that comes from the only God ? - Jhn 5:41-44 NIV
If youre going to insist that all we can do is miscommunicate, why even acknowledge me as a thinking person? Why not just dismiss and ignore me?
If your backwards relugious dogma isnt compatible, and prevents you from even interfacing with new ideas, you must do away with it.
Who is predisposed here? You, locked into your narrow single book, or me, criticizing you for it?
Quote
Like the elders you describe, you reject because of your pride. You make yourself deaf to words like "the foolishness of preaching," thinking you'll get at the truth through reason & scholarly research. Through the foolishness of prayer. That's important. Try reading with the stress on "foolishness" -- it's not always a bad thing.
I'm still not sure what you think it is I'm rejecting...? God can be presented in a reasonable and scholarly way, and declared in the most foolish. Both are effective and both serve his purposes.
Man shall not live on bread alone but on every word that proceeds from the mouth of God..
There are many things we can learn, many blessings he has for those who seek. Again, these are not necessary for salvation, just perks for the walk, but that's what it is for me now: Walking with God, by the spirit, not striving, yet being taught, praying, trusting, and He is faithful, even with the small things. I've lost track of how many times he has answered the prayers of my heart in ways I could not expect or imagine were possible, other times he has done exactly what he has shown me he would do, and shown his timing to be so immaculate that it leaves no doubt. I've witnessed the impossible, and seen the unseen, It's my every day life, but does it not sound like foolishness?
All this even though I spent (wasted?) a decade questioning whether there was a god, or who was behind the curtain. Ask him. He'll show you. That's all I've got.
Touche indeed.
No, but you'll notice that the very prophecies that they so despised were still recorded and preserved as such for your contemporary reading pleasure. The system of review and "checksums" that the scribes were subject to in preserving the material did not leave room for editorial except to add figures to aid pronunciation as the languages developed. You might be fascinated to learn of the incredible amount of pressure they were under to keep accurate reproductions.
They form encapsulated packets of divine inspiration, sealed and hashed, as it were, in a blockchain of widely published scripture.
Also, IMHO, any divine inspiration should be checked against Jesus own words.
...
In other words, you want us to disregard divine inspiration, and trust, instead, these selfsame elders? The ones capable of ... such a misstep?
In other words, you want us to disregard divine inspiration, and trust, instead, these selfsame elders? The ones capable of ... such a misstep?
No, but you'll notice that the very prophecies that they so despised were still recorded and preserved as such for your contemporary reading pleasure. The system of review and "checksums" that the scribes were subject to in preserving the material did not leave room for editorial except to add figures to aid pronunciation as the languages developed. You might be fascinated to learn of the incredible amount of pressure they were under to keep accurate reproductions.
They form encapsulated packets of divine inspiration, sealed and hashed, as it were, in a blockchain of widely published scripture.
Also, IMHO, any divine inspiration should be checked against Jesus own words.
Quote
I see. You read some of the Bible's most sublime words, and all you get is how badly Da Jewz blew it? It's Da Gentiles turn now? Your tracting is not just tedious, it's a bit... Well, I sure won't change you.
"Da Jewz blew it?" I quoted Romans 11 just to highlight the more sublime aspects of it. I didn't write it.
Salvation came to the Jews first, the elect among them who would believe. The elders rejected Jesus because of pride, at least most did. And we're back to Nicodemus.
Quoting one verse of the Bible to explain another one, especially when asked "what does this mean to you," leads to infinite regress & circular definitions. I did get your point, i think: "What's sublime to some could be interpreted as ineptly worded bigotry by others." And no, you didn't write Romans, only selectively quoted it to serve your ends. Touche.
The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is based on merely human rules they have been taught."
Like the elders you describe, you reject because of your pride. You make yourself deaf to words like "the foolishness of preaching," thinking you'll get at the truth through reason & scholarly research. Through the foolishness of prayer. That's important. Try reading with the stress on "foolishness" -- it's not always a bad thing.
Quote
I see. You read some of the Bible's most sublime words, and all you get is how badly Da Jewz blew it? It's Da Gentiles turn now? Your tracting is not just tedious, it's a bit... Well, I sure won't change you.
"Da Jewz blew it?" I quoted Romans 11 just to highlight the more sublime aspects of it. I didn't write it.
Salvation came to the Jews first, the elect among them who would believe. The elders rejected Jesus because of pride, at least most did. And we're back to Nicodemus.
All of this was called in advance, in the verses I showed you from Isaiah. If you want to dispute that, fine, but I'm about done for today.
Quote
Good point. Then why did you point out that false prophets were ill tolerated? Seems like the true ones fare even worse! With the elders & all.
Good point, but killing false prophets was the law. Their killing of the prophets that criticised them was a hidden shame that God has reacted to. Strongly.
Quote
Lol. How did that work out for Joseph & Mary's kid? He should have worked more with the elders, huh?
Read my previous post. God did exactly what He said he would do.
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing." - Jesus
Good point. Then why did you point out that false prophets were ill tolerated? Seems like the true ones fare even worse! With the elders & all.
No, that IS the answer. Preaching = anecdotal = foolishness > wisdom of man.
If I must spell it out, I'm at your service.
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
The gospel means redemption to those who believe it, but is completely unnecessary foolishness to those who see no need for redemption, don't see their sin (despite the law), or even equate themselves with God,
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
Refers to Isaiah, written before Christ, "Therefore once more I will astound these people with wonder upon wonder; the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
The context is of God lecturing the religious:
The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is based on merely human rules they have been taught."
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
For all the astonishing things God had done for the Hebrew people, they loved their traditions and ego-boosting positions more than Him. He'd rather pour himself out among those who would be grateful.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
The stumblingblock refers again to Isaiah, which Jesus adds to here: [43] "Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. [44] Anyone who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; anyone on whom it falls will be crushed." - Mat 21:43-44 NIV
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Corinthians, 18-25, KJV.
This leads us to the doctrine of election, referred to with great consistency in the NT, which is too often mangled by the likes of Westboro as though we weren't on the hook to preach to "every creature."
EDIT: It is tedious, isn't it? If I miss a point it's not avoidance, just either missed it or don't have the time.
If I must spell it out, I'm at your service.
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
The gospel means redemption to those who believe it, but is completely unnecessary foolishness to those who see no need for redemption, don't see their sin (despite the law), or even equate themselves with God,
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
Refers to Isaiah, written before Christ, "Therefore once more I will astound these people with wonder upon wonder; the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
The context is of God lecturing the religious:
The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is based on merely human rules they have been taught."
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
For all the astonishing things God had done for the Hebrew people, they loved their traditions and ego-boosting positions more than Him. He'd rather pour himself out among those who would be grateful.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
The stumblingblock refers again to Isaiah, which Jesus adds to here: [43] "Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. [44] Anyone who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; anyone on whom it falls will be crushed." - Mat 21:43-44 NIV
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Corinthians, 18-25, KJV.
This leads us to the doctrine of election, referred to with great consistency in the NT, which is too often mangled by the likes of Westboro as though we weren't on the hook to preach to "every creature."
Quote
[5] So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. [6] And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace. [7] What then? What the people of Israel sought so earnestly they did not obtain. The elect among them did, but the others were hardened, [8] as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that could not see and ears that could not hear, to this very day." [9] And David says: "May their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them. [10] May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent forever." [11] Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. [12] But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring! - Romans 11:5-12 NIV
EDIT: It is tedious, isn't it? If I miss a point it's not avoidance, just either missed it or don't have the time.
I see. You read some of the Bible's most sublime words, and all you get is how badly Da Jewz blew it? It's Da Gentiles turn now? Your tracting is not just tedious, it's a bit... Well, I sure won't change you.
Quote
Lol. How did that work out for Joseph & Mary's kid? He should have worked more with the elders, huh?
Read my previous post. God did exactly what He said he would do.
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing." - Jesus
...
Are you saying that Muhammad was *not* a prophet? Read the definition:
"In religion, a prophet is an individual who is claimed to have been contacted by the supernatural or the divine, and to speak for them, serving as an intermediary with humanity, delivering this newfound knowledge from the supernatural entity to other people.[1][2] The message that the prophet conveys is called a prophecy." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophets_of_Islam#Table_of_prophets.2Fmessengers_in_the_Quran )
Are you saying that Muhammad was *not* a prophet? Read the definition:
"In religion, a prophet is an individual who is claimed to have been contacted by the supernatural or the divine, and to speak for them, serving as an intermediary with humanity, delivering this newfound knowledge from the supernatural entity to other people.[1][2] The message that the prophet conveys is called a prophecy." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophets_of_Islam#Table_of_prophets.2Fmessengers_in_the_Quran )
That's the definition as Islam would have it. That makes any old psychic hotline lady a prophet as well.
No, the way it was done in the OT was that if someone had a message with a prophecy from God to declare, they would stand before the elders of that time and deliver it. The scribes would record and notarize it. That way, if it came true, it would be on the record who said it, and further attention would be paid to the other things they said. There was extremely little tolerance for false prophets, so such was rarely attempted. This is why we have the books of the prophets.
Lol. How did that work out for Joseph & Mary's kid? He should have worked more with the elders, huh?
No, that IS the answer. Preaching = anecdotal = foolishness > wisdom of man.
If I must spell it out, I'm at your service.
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
The gospel means redemption to those who believe it, but is completely unnecessary foolishness to those who see no need for redemption, don't see their sin (despite the law), or even equate themselves with God,
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
Refers to Isaiah, written before Christ, "Therefore once more I will astound these people with wonder upon wonder; the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
The context is of God lecturing the religious:
The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is based on merely human rules they have been taught."
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
For all the astonishing things God had done for the Hebrew people, they loved their traditions and ego-boosting positions more than Him. He'd rather pour himself out among those who would be grateful.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
The stumblingblock refers again to Isaiah, which Jesus adds to here: [43] "Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. [44] Anyone who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; anyone on whom it falls will be crushed." - Mat 21:43-44 NIV
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Corinthians, 18-25, KJV.
This leads us to the doctrine of election, referred to with great consistency in the NT, which is too often mangled by the likes of Westboro as though we weren't on the hook to preach to "every creature."
EDIT: It is tedious, isn't it? If I miss a point it's not avoidance, just either missed it or don't have the time.
If I must spell it out, I'm at your service.
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
The gospel means redemption to those who believe it, but is completely unnecessary foolishness to those who see no need for redemption, don't see their sin (despite the law), or even equate themselves with God,
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
Refers to Isaiah, written before Christ, "Therefore once more I will astound these people with wonder upon wonder; the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
The context is of God lecturing the religious:
The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is based on merely human rules they have been taught."
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
For all the astonishing things God had done for the Hebrew people, they loved their traditions and ego-boosting positions more than Him. He'd rather pour himself out among those who would be grateful.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
The stumblingblock refers again to Isaiah, which Jesus adds to here: [43] "Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. [44] Anyone who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; anyone on whom it falls will be crushed." - Mat 21:43-44 NIV
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Corinthians, 18-25, KJV.
This leads us to the doctrine of election, referred to with great consistency in the NT, which is too often mangled by the likes of Westboro as though we weren't on the hook to preach to "every creature."
Quote
[5] So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. [6] And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace. [7] What then? What the people of Israel sought so earnestly they did not obtain. The elect among them did, but the others were hardened, [8] as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that could not see and ears that could not hear, to this very day." [9] And David says: "May their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them. [10] May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent forever." [11] Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. [12] But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring! - Romans 11:5-12 NIV
EDIT: It is tedious, isn't it? If I miss a point it's not avoidance, just either missed it or don't have the time.
...
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Corinthians, 18-25, KJV.
^^^^Please tell me what these lines mean to you
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Corinthians, 18-25, KJV.
^^^^Please tell me what these lines mean to you
You seem to have been asserting that Almighty God don't Need no Stinkin' Scrolls. Well no, and he doesn't "need" anyone or anything either. Is he not also free to chose sovereignly which way to go about something, or should he check with you first, to make sure it's what you're expecting?
Lol. No, i never said He has to do anything. Please re-read my replies to figure out where you got that idea.
Quote
Without a written record, any testimony of God is strictly anecdotal, and can be dismissed as foolishness.
"...it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe." Do you even bother reading? If not, I'll stop replying. I've asked you a simple question: What do these words mean to you (Corinthians, 18-25). You didn't answer me, nor, it appears, even bother reading. [snip] Please, re-read & answer.
Edit: This is the depressing structure of "the interwebz debate": (Kidz, cut & paste this handy guide!)
1. Find some tedious sucker, crumbcake in this case, to punctually (point by point) reply to your post.
2. With each consecutive rebuttal, ignore all the points you're unable/unwilling to address. Make sure to miss the point of the remaining few.
3. ? ? ?
4. Not really sure.
...
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Corinthians, 18-25, KJV.
^^^^Please tell me what these lines mean to you
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Corinthians, 18-25, KJV.
^^^^Please tell me what these lines mean to you
You seem to have been asserting that Almighty God don't Need no Stinkin' Scrolls. Well no, and he doesn't "need" anyone or anything either. Is he not also free to chose sovereignly which way to go about something, or should he check with you first, to make sure it's what you're expecting?
Without a written record, any testimony of God is strictly anecdotal, and can be dismissed as foolishness. Even that which was written was dismissed when it was inconvenient. There are times and places for both.
"You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life."
Quote
Quote
Faith was not a concept in the Aramaic. The word was one with Faithfulness, as in "trust in one who proves faithful." Atheists frequent the term as though it were a free, logical wildcard with which to make fools of us. It's insincere and doesn't lend itself to logical argument.
Now we're getting somewhere. "Faith does not lend itself to logical argument." Thanks for not making me reach for pointless links to definition that's appropriate in theological context.
That's not quite what I said, is it?
Quote
Quote
EDIT "So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal."
Brain exercise: How could something eternal be seen in the temporal?
IMHO, Spirit is exactly that duality which can make the leap, so to speak.
Quote
Did you read my edit? Do you believe God is incapable of making Himself known by simply willing it? That he needs to rely on validation through attestments of men?
He can show himself at will. He does it all the time. You suppose he's doing it wrongly, or inadequately, on the premise that you understand the very role of mankind in eternity better than he does.
Not at all. He's doing it exactly as he is doing it. Where did I imply that God has failed in any way?
Quote
You also seem to enshrine faith beyond any religious person I've known...
Two possible explanations for that: I'm wrong, or you don't know anyone worth knowing. The latter is a bit harsh, but i'm afraid i'm still betting on it.
Quote
Faith itself is not what saves you. Jesus is. It requires a leap of faith to trust that his forgiveness is for you and that his resurrection can be yours.
Leap of faith? Have you been reading Kierkegaard on a full stomach? Regardless, i'm not sure exactly what you're addressing here.
Quote
Quote
[John 20:29] Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
[30] Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.
[31] But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
[30] Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.
[31] But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Corinthians, 18-25, KJV.
^^^^Please tell me what these lines mean to you
Quote
Faith was not a concept in the Aramaic. The word was one with Faithfulness, as in "trust in one who proves faithful." Atheists frequent the term as though it were a free, logical wildcard with which to make fools of us. It's insincere and doesn't lend itself to logical argument.
Now we're getting somewhere. "Faith does not lend itself to logical argument." Thanks for not making me reach for pointless links to definition that's appropriate in theological context.
Quote
EDIT "So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal."
Edit: Bolded (not "emboldened," FFS! That's just... EWWW!) the text in Corin. quote.
Can it be done?
You said it yourself, you are predisposed to that conclusion in my case, because I will not validate your mundane concept of deity.
"My satanism redefines deity into something so radically mundane as to render sacredness itself common. Of course, I maintain that this redefinition is needed for any valid discussion of god to be more than a creepy, overmedicated set of empty quotes and salesmanship of snipehunting gear."
If nothing can ever possibly be sacred to you, then we can only miscommunicate. Let it be.
MORE:
You said it yourself, you are predisposed to that conclusion in my case, because I will not validate your mundane concept of deity.
"My satanism redefines deity into something so radically mundane as to render sacredness itself common. Of course, I maintain that this redefinition is needed for any valid discussion of god to be more than a creepy, overmedicated set of empty quotes and salesmanship of snipehunting gear."
If nothing can ever possibly be sacred to you, then we can only miscommunicate. Let it be.
Quote
[1] Therefore, since through God's mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart. [2] Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God. [3] And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. [4] The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. [5] For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. - 2Cr 4:1-5 NIV
MORE:
Quote
[41] "I do not accept glory from human beings, [42] but I know you. I know that you do not have the love of God in your hearts. [43] I have come in my Father's name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. [44] How can you believe since you accept glory from one another but do not seek the glory that comes from the only God ? - Jhn 5:41-44 NIV
Quote
Did you read my edit? Do you believe God is incapable of making Himself known by simply willing it? That he needs to rely on validation through attestments of men?
He can show himself at will. He does it all the time. You suppose he's doing it wrongly, or inadequately, on the premise that you understand the very role of mankind in eternity better than he does.
You also seem to enshrine faith beyond any religious person I've known... Faith itself is not what saves you. Jesus is. It requires a leap of faith to trust that his forgiveness is for you and that his resurrection can be yours.
Quote
[John 20:29] Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
[30] Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.
[31] But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
[30] Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.
[31] But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
Faith was not a concept in the Aramaic. The word was one with Faithfulness, as in "trust in one who proves faithful." Atheists frequent the term as though it were a free, logical wildcard with which to make fools of us. It's insincere and doesn't lend itself to logical argument.
EDIT "So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal."
Quote from: neurobox link=topic=211865.msg2321696#msg2321696
...
accurately preserving those statements for millennia
...
accurately preserving those statements for millennia
...
nope
I feel obliged to again point out that you cannot testify your personal relationship with jesus without sounding exactly like a lofty, pretentious disconnected nutcase. Do you get that? Why not fix it?
Quote
Did you read my edit? Do you believe God is incapable of making Himself known by simply willing it? That he needs to rely on validation through attestments of men?
He can show himself at will. He does it all the time. You suppose he's doing it wrongly, or inadequately, on the premise that you understand the very role of mankind in eternity better than he does.
You also seem to enshrine faith beyond any religious person I've known... Faith itself is not what saves you. Jesus is. It requires a leap of faith to trust that his forgiveness is for you and that his resurrection can be yours.
Quote
[John 20:29] Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
[30] Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.
[31] But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
[30] Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.
[31] But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
Faith was not a concept in the Aramaic. The word was one with Faithfulness, as in "trust in one who proves faithful." Atheists frequent the term as though it were a free, logical wildcard with which to make fools of us. It's insincere and doesn't lend itself to logical argument.
EDIT "So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal."
Because anyone can say anything, but God put many things on the record for us, and signed them with fulfilment. For one, Isaiah was authenticated in this way even before his prophecies of the messiah which were fulfilled in Christ.
Quote
[21] That is why some Jews seized me in the temple courts and tried to kill me. [22] But God has helped me to this very day; so I stand here and testify to small and great alike. I am saying nothing beyond what the prophets and Moses said would happen-- [23] that the Messiah would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would bring the message of light to his own people and to the Gentiles." - Acts 26:21-23 NIV
Please. The Red Sea was parted to make a point as much as safe passage. I think this God can make his will known without the say-so & stamp of approval from some old fogies.
Those "old fogies" just somehow miraculously happened to be the ones capable of accurately preserving those statements for millennia. How many civilisations on Earth have even lasted that long, let alone tested and approved prophetic documents?
Would you prefer that God strictly speak through plagues, partings and major events, while you try to decipher what he wants from them?
The red sea story could be said to foreshadow Christ, so could all the hebrew feasts, but none were so direct a prophecy as Isaiah gave. It also makes the point that one person, plus God, can change all of history to follow.
Did you read my edit? Do you believe God is incapable of making Himself known by simply willing it? That he needs to rely on validation through attestments of men?
Please try to understand that we're talking about faith, and any proof would destroy faith, making it nothing more than a reasonable conviction. If God's existence could be proven, "believing" in him wouldn't get you the cupie doll.
Edit: No one *ever* has to "decypher" what God wants. God doesn't have trouble communicating, he's good at it.
Edit2: You're short-changing the god that (i assume) you believe in. That god is God! He needs no assistance from man*. He created/creates/will create time itself, the reality/illusion/(A & ~A) -- that's the power level i'm talking about. Not some termite-eaten scrolls.
Jump to: