User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 4:57:35 AM EST
[#1]
I don't think that anyone would belittle onemangang for finding God. That fact that he has come to God is cause for celebration!!!
No Hun. That is where you are wrong. Sin only leads to alienation from God. God's grace is what brought the adulteress to Jesus And it is God's grace that brought onemangang to Jesus. His previous sins are irrelevant to his salvation at this point, but they did NOT bring him to God. He could have just as easily gone the other way. I have seen it happen. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:03:11 AM EST
[#2]
You don't believe in the divine inspiration of scripture. Thus you cannot use them in any sort of theological debate. You pull them all out of context and torture their meaning in the first place, and then deny the inspiration of anything that disagrees with the tortured ideas you beat from scripture. I have already adressed your silly "gotcha" question with Jesus' own words, and it obviously did no good. I will not make the attempt again. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:06:13 AM EST
[#3]
I don't think Jesus really would care that you did that.... Its ok....
Do I detect a sliver of doubt to your very own statments! 
There are many translations.... Most japanese fellers when they speak Engrish tend to grate on the ears too.....
Certainly? or Likley? You seem unsure. What specifically in that verse do you find so blashpemous and why? Should we not seek? Should we not hope to find? And would we not be troubled to find that what some men are teaching is not the correct information? and would this information not astonish us? and once we understand our nature could any man rule us? What is so off about this verse?
No they are not... They were assembled by man and certain 'books' were omitted that went against the power of the church... But again we are talking about stoned Christians and not this stuff right? |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:10:07 AM EST
[#4]
Oh dear heavens!
Don't start bringing Bible history up, because then you are just ASKING for your ignorance to be exposed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:12:02 AM EST
[#5]
 Chris |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:14:07 AM EST
[#6]
I take it from that post that you are intimately familiar with Bible history? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:19:22 AM EST
[#7]
the dickhead is probably just laughing because he's stoned |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:19:33 AM EST
[#8]
Literally or metaphorically is my point here.... I can only surmise from you 2 tim post that you took Soberly literally but at the same time you take Mark metaphorically when it talks of drinking poision and taking up serpents.... And just to be on topic you ingore the creation story of Genesis as I have posted... But Thank you your non answer is an answer enough..... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:20:39 AM EST
[#9]
Post from MonkeysUncle -
Nope. Keep reading.
Yes, indeed. But...keep reading.
Now see, here is where you are as wrong as can be. You assume that the woman 'taken in adultery' was something more than what we are told in the Scriptures! Her sin in committing adultery is the only thing that caused her otherwise chance meeting with the Lord! She wasn't seeking Jesus on that day! She didn't encounter Him on the road by chance. She wasn't brought to Him by her friends! She was led forcefully to Him by men who sought her immediate destruction! And the only reason for that was that she was 'taken in adultery.' A sin, and a capital offense under the Law! What Jesus did was instructive to us all, and, hopefully, what occurred made a lasting change upon this young woman, as well, but we are in the dark about her ultimate fate. Her chance meeting with Jesus was the direct result of her sinning on that day. She was presented with the opportunity to meet the Master of Life and to receive His Forgiveness, and that all resulted from her otherwise unfortunate sin.
Amen to that!
He says that they did. I am not in a position to say that they didn't. It's not like either he or I am saying that his sin was as convincing to him as the Gospels! It's that in his then condition, however that condition was, or might have been, and despite how it may have occurred, he accepted Jesus and commenced his walk with Him.
Absolutely! Haven't we all? Eric The(HeavenByChanceOrPredestination?)Hun 
|
||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:24:39 AM EST
[#10]
Back on topic!
Jesus on Drugs! Jesus, in a very worried state, convened all of his apostles and disciples to an emergency meeting because of the high drug consumption problem all over the earth. After giving it much thought they reached the conclusion that in order to better deal with the problem, that they should try the drugs themselves and then decide on the correct way to proceed. It was therefore decided that a commission made up of some of the members return to earth to get the different types of drugs. The secret operation is effected and two days later the commissioned disciples begin to return to heaven. Jesus, waiting at the door, lets in the first disciple: "Who is it?" "It's Paul" Jesus opens the door. "What did you bring Paul?" "Hashish from Morocco" "Very well son, come in." "Who is it?" It's Mark" Jesus opens the door. "What did you bring Mark?" "Marijuana from Colombia" "Very well son, come in." "Who is it?" "It's Matthew" Jesus opens the door. "What did you bring Matthew ?" "Cocaine from Bolivia" "Very well son, come in." "Who is it?" "It's John" Jesus opens the door. "What did you bring John ?" "Crack from New York" "Very well son, come in." "Who is it?" It's Luke" Jesus opens the door. "What did you bring Luke ?" "Speed from Amsterdam" "Very well son, come in." "Who is it?" "It's Judas" Jesus opens the door. "What did you bring Judas ?" "The FBI, YOU SCUMBALLS! EVERYONE ASSUME THE POSITION AGAINST THE WALL!"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:25:55 AM EST
[#11]
No JW, it seems to me that you are more help in pushing people away from religion than building your flock. kind of how you pushed me further from religion than towards it, you seem to be doing the same here.  .chris |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:30:26 AM EST
[#12]
We have been over the CONTEXT arguement before, to no avail.
I do not recall you posting on the creation story in Genesis. I assume it would be along the lines of whether or not the creation story was literal or figurative given the "evidence" we have for evolution or some nonsense like that. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:34:28 AM EST
[#13]
YOUR context or the highway right? Or the Context as told to you by your preacherman? Both fallable humans whos very nature is to err......
Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 2:9 [And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die What did you miss? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:40:00 AM EST
[#14]
OK Hun. (Boy, I can tell you are a lawyer!  ) If you mean what physically brought her to Jesus, then I concede. (and who's to say there wasn't a little divine intervention going on with that too) But the physical is a loonnnggg way from the spiritual. The scriptures imply that she repented her sins. That is seeking God. That is accepting God. You don't have to sin to accept Jesus. And sinning certainly doesn't "bring" you there. It is God's grace that get you "there". And it is God's grace that OVERCAME the drugs in reaching into onemangang's heart! He has been blessed far more than he realizes. Things could have easily gone quite the opposite. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:42:35 AM EST
[#15]
I am not here to "build a flock". Success is not defined as having taught some weak, watered down, sissification of the truth that sounds good to people and demands nothing of them. 10,000 people in a church doesn't mean beans if those 10,000 people are not truly living with Christ as Lord. Christ commanded us to: "9Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Matthew 28 Jesus didn't command us to make friends, or to tell people nice things, but to preach His truth to all men, and to teach them to OBEY His voice. One single person who is in genuine relationship with Christ and who reveres Him as Lord is worth more than a billion people who profess Christ but do not posess Christ. If only one person is taught to revere Christ because I have spoken the whole counsel of God to them, then and only then have I been a true servant of the Most High God. There is a reason that the Bible calls Jesus the "stone of stumbling" and a "rock of offense." Some people will hear the Gospel message and reject it because they think it is too severe, or for a myriad of other reasons. The bottom line is that Christ is who He is, and said what He said, and no ammount of wishing or thinking on my part or anyone else's will change it.
I never "pushed" you away from anything, but it would be nice if you were pushed away from "religion" and pushed toward a real relationship with Christ. All I have done is tell you what the Bible has said. I have quoted it over and over and over and over again, to the point that you expressed frustration with "corinthians this and ephesians that." As a result: "6Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. 27For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God." Acts 20 I have only spoken to you the divinely inspired Word of God, that is eternal and will never pass away. What you do with it after I have shown it to you and encouraged you to pick it up for yourself and seek God in repentence, prayer, and fasting, is between you and God. I have told you the absolute truth before God because I take my obligation to speak the truth before God seriously. My very soul hangs in the balance. God expects me to do nothing more than speak the truth, and live the truth. What anyone does with it after that is their buisness. But in that great day, I want no man to look at me and ask me why I didn't tell them the truth. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:50:25 AM EST
[#16]
No, the context of the Bible that is RIGHT THERE for anyone to read, or in your case, ignore. My "preacherman" didn't write the Bible, and didn't write those other verses that nicely destroy the vain arguements and silly fables you try to craft by perverting the text. The Holy Spirit wrote them, knowing that people would come along and try to twist scripture, which is why He wrote: "3If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, 4he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions 5and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth" 1st Timothy 6
I'm sorry, I don't see a problem there. I do see you trying to buzz in on the word "every" while ignoring the entire next verse, showing quite nicely how you deal with scripture in general, and why no one should bother to listen to your interpretations of it. Focus right here AND ONLY right here, and ignore everything that went before it and after it, because that damages the point I want this to make!! Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!! Peter, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, said it best: "9And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; 20knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." 2nd Peter 1 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:51:23 AM EST
[#17]
Well, our Jesus, the One revealed in the Gospels, wouldn't mind!
Not in the least. That's just how Southerners sometimes speak. Get used to it! The Rust Belt is dying. And Jersey's already buried.
Isn't it strange then that none of the sayings or sermons of Jesus spoken in Aramaic and translated into English grates on our present day ears? It was something that amazed the translators of the King James Bible. Every time they translated a phrase or sentence into English from some non-English source, it had a poetry all its own. They attributed it to God. As do I. But when I read the so-called 'gospel of Thomas', I cannot help but think of someone making up quotes much like Jules did in 'Pulp Fiction.'
Nonsense. I stand on a Rock. And that Rock has a Name. And is unchanging.
First and foremost, it was not the work of St. Thomas, the Apostle. He died in the First Century AD. The so-called 'gospel of Thomas' dates from the mid-Second Century at the very earliest! Second, the Early Church, and I don't mean the Romans, did not accept it as canonical. Third, while some of the contents mimic what was writeen in the Gospels, the remainder is nothing like what we find in the Gospels. It can't be half right and half wrong. So, it is all wrong!
Of course, and just listen to how our Jesus said it: Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Matthew 7:7,8 And, again: I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. Now, the Saviour Who said such Magnificient Words in the Gospel never uttered those in your snippet from the so-called 'gospel of Thomas'! By the way, those Words of Life were uttered in Aramaic! Do they grate on your ears? I would imagine that when translated into Japanese they would not grate on those ears, either!
What are you talking about? Make sense, please!
I told you. It ain't Him!
Tsk, tsk, tsk! His Church has accepted them as such for almost 2,000 years! If you find them lacking, then you are simply out of luck! They won't be added to for your amusement and acceptance!
They were written and assembled by men directed by the Holy Spirit and acting under Its guidance! There was no 'Roman' Church to worry about offending. Or to try and maintain its power! It didn't exist in the first three Centuries of our prsent age. The Church at Rome was simply one of a large number of Christian Churches and its Bishop merely one among many. Don't confuse human history with Church History. The entire Church, worldwide, accepted what later came to be included in the New Testament.
Actually we are talking about formerly-stoned folks who became Christians. I am one. onemangang admits to being another. Are you going to try and make something from that? Be my guest! Eric The(APoorDefenderOfTheFaith)Hun
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 5:59:24 AM EST
[#18]
I actually knew some buddhist monks in dallas that would partake of a little of the wacky tabacky before "services" (I don't know what it would be called) because they believe it lets one empty the mind easier and be more receptive to meditation.
They were definatly not smoking it "just to get high" and even had a special tool for smoking it, (it looked like a cone, and they held it with their middle and ring finger and smoked through their hand) I am by no means saying that you can shoot herion and find Jesus, but like everything else there can be benefits and downfalls. *this post by no means, that buddhists want you to get high. Just an observation from my experience. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:00:48 AM EST
[#19]
What are you now saying that psychadelic mushrooms are from the "tree of knowledge?" What am I not getting about this specific example of "EVERY"? Can you answer this? Show me in Genesis where I should take EVERY to mean anything other than EVERY?
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:03:38 AM EST
[#20]
There is a long tradition of using mind altering substances as a means of elevating thought in many religions. That is beyond dispute.
But that tradition is not found in Christianity. The closest thing you can find in any sort of mainline Christianity is the use of incence, which just smells good. It has no narcotic effect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:06:34 AM EST
[#21]
Are mushrooms trees? Do they produce fruit? Do we live in Eden? Then how on earth do you take God's direction to eat the fruits of all trees but one in the garden of Eden as license to eat mushrooms that will trip you out? That's the joy of CONTEXT. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:10:47 AM EST
[#22]
Oh I see what you are saying, Well while it may not be widely accepted at least it caused this young man (or old man I don't know) to look for a higher power is good in and of itself. I am glad no one is going out and getting plastered to find god, but like they say, He works in mysterious ways. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:25:13 AM EST
[#23]
Great then we agree.... No Jesus would mind....
Hell I did not need divine guidance to know that Jersey is long gone... Consider me a front line Soldier for out Constitution... Thats 2 things we agree on...... I wonder what will be the third and forth horse.....
To you maybe but we are not all the borg.... Revalations 14:3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 14:4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb 144,000 and no woman? That surely greats on MY ears!
I only ask because your language made you seem so unsure....
Link with Carbon dating proof? _______________
Hmmm.... Two examples that if we were to follow your logic you would have to throw the whole bible out! Acts 9:7 "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man." Acts.22:9 "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me." Did they or did they not "Hear the voice"... Next: Did Jesus come to bring peace? He did: Lk.2:14 "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." Jn.14:27 "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you." Acts 10:36 "The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ." He did not: Mt.10:34 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." Lk.12:51 "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law." Lk.22:36 "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
Why would they? But the Gospel of Thomas does not either..... Are you really making a subjective emotional feeling a foundation for a rational argument as to which is truth and which is not?
I bet your wrong... A lot of concepts and structure of thier grammar makes it very hard to translate anything correctly.. But I am going on fact here not feeling so YMMV....
It makes complete sense..... If you have no answer then thats ok too....
Its funny because I don't need a book to understand the nature of God..... I already hang with him as he is of all of us!.....
So the Roman church then did corrupt the religion is that what you are saying? When was the bible assembled?
Ouch... A little touchy subject here eh? I quoted from the Bible where it was ok for you to take of every tree..... Its not me "making something of that" I was simply trying to steer back on topic, cowboy..... |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:25:36 AM EST
[#24]
You guys are missing the point.
It's not about whether doing drugs is wrong or right (it's wrong if you must ask). It's about what or who leads a person to know God. Drugs don't do it. The Holy Spirit does it. Only by the gracious power of His Spirit does He reveal Himself. Can the Holy Spirit work on a person while they are high? I suppose so. Are drugs necessary to find God? Of course not. Should we encourage others by telling them the "good news" of drugs? Of course not. Should we denounce or sins of old (like drug use) and start afresh in the Spirit of God? YES! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:34:10 AM EST
[#25]
My roomate in college was an indian (feather, not dot). He explored his mind with peyote, he didn't necessarily enjoy it but, he said it did bring him closer to the earth/nature (he was also ex-82 abn/ranger) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:36:45 AM EST
[#26]
OOOH so I get it.... We can eat of everything in the Garden.... Ok now show me where it says we can't eat of everything outside the Garden.... By using your logic we really shouldn't be doing that communion stuff because Jesus was talking only to his 12 deciples...... ok.... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:41:24 AM EST
[#27]
not even gonna bother JW. no matter the path, he found his way to god, and from everything I've read, that's all that matters. apparently that isn't good enough for "your interpretation" Chris |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:43:37 AM EST
[#28]
+1 There are mamy paths up the mountain..... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:45:07 AM EST
[#29]
agreed. Chris |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 6:46:14 AM EST
[#30]
I had an offer, to come out to the desert and try the peyote from an indian friend of mine. He told me its not like a fun thing. But he still offered. I was like... hmmm eat some nasty cactus shrooms, dig a hole, throw up for 1/2 and hour into the hole, and then spend 1-3 days tripping and then at the end teach myself to talk again. as the germans say Nein Danke |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 7:18:05 AM EST
[#31]
sorry to kill the thread, but sheesh.
 Chris |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 7:55:27 AM EST
[#32]
There is only one Way, one Truth, one Life and no one comes to the Father except through Him. His name is Jesus and He is the living Messiah, the Lord of lords and King of kings. If you have arrived at "god" by any other means than through Him, then you are mistaken. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 8:16:50 AM EST
[#33]
he found god, and that still isn't good enough. now it's "but you didn't find god the right way"   unreal. Chris |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 8:17:54 AM EST
[#34]
I have no idea which 'Jesus' you are referring to, at all. So, I'm not certain it's 'great' nor that we agree on anything.
Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. Matthew 16:23
'Seems, madam? Nay, I know not 'seems.' ~ Hamlet, Hamlet, Act I, scene ii Southerners sometimes don't like to offend other folks by making categorical statements of fact. Such as, 'It's likely that New Jersey will never adopt concealed carry licenses for its general population.' When, we all know for a fact, that Hell would freeze over before New Jersey did such a thing! No 'likely' about is at all, is there? We're just being polite.
Sorry, but when discussing documents, analysis of writing styles are the among the best keys to dating.
First, you must understand that you are reading two verses written by the very same individual, Luke the Physician, under divine guidance. It would be incredible to believe that he would be telling the story to the same audience and make any mistakes, at all, being under divine inspiration. Here's the best explanation I have found for understanding this matter and is found in the 'Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties' by Gleason L. Archer. An excerpt from his discussion is as follows: . . . In the original Greek, however, there is no real contradiction between these two statements. Greek makes a distinction between hearing a sound as a noise (in which case the verb "to hear" takes the genitive case) and hearing a voice as a thought-conveying message (in which case it takes the accusative). Therefore, as we put the two statements together, we find that Paul's companions heard the Voice as a sound (somewhat like the crowd who heard the sound of the Father talking to the Son in John 12:28, but perceived it only as thunder); but they did not (like Paul) hear the message that it articulated. Paul alone heard it inteligibly (Acts 9:4 says Paul ekousen phonen--accusative case); though he, of course, perceived it also as a startling sound at first (Acts 22:7: "I fell to the ground and heard a voice [ekousa phones] saying to me," NASB). But in neither account is it stated that his companions ever heard that Voice in the accusative case. -- Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, by Gleason L. Archer, p. 382. Lord, I love to read from inspired men!
I tell you what, my friend, start another thread on the 'Contradictions in the New Testament' in General Discussion and you will have my undivided attention, but let's leave this thread to something along what the original author intended. Please post such a thread! I look forward to it with relish!
Yes, along with everything else, the rejection by the Christian Chuch, the non-historical nature of that gospel, the language used, and the thoughts conveyed, the utter medocrity of the thoughts conveyed is the icing on the cake.
I seriously doubt that! So there are some verbal statements in English that cannot be properly remdered in Japanese? If that's true, then I would have hoped that Adm. Halsey's statement about the Japanese language have actually come true! If it's so limited. But I don't think it's so limited as you seem to believe.
If that's some 'quote' from the 'gospel of Thomas', sorry, but I don't recognize it. If you are the author of that statement, then I apologize for mistaking thee for thy betters!
Hah-hah-hah! That's rich! Incredibly stupid, but very rich!
I didn't say any such thing. I may believe that, but I did not say it. Are you having a reading problem, as well?
You mean collected together? The Old Testament, was a single collection of 'books' by at least the 10th Century BC. But remember there were 'books' as we know them, but scrolls. The New Testament's collection of writings was compiled during the First Century AD, during the lifetimes of their various authors, and, unlike some others who give later dates, I think completed by at least 70 AD, prior to the Fall of Jerusalem. Totally. Including Revelations, which is always give as the latest book written (c. 95 AD).
Really? You think so? Then why in the world would I even mention it? You would never have known, and I could have kept my mouth shut. But I'm not the least bit touchy about my past! You've struck out every time you've been to the plate in this game, so far!
But what does that prove? 'You can take from every tree'??? You can take from every tree boards to build a house for a poor widow woman, or take from a tree, a club to kill someone with, are you saying they are both permitted?
Steer back on topic and yet wishing to engage in '101 Contradictory Things in the Bible', with me? Oooh, the crowd groans as the batter goes down swinging! Eric The(NoHitsNoRunsNoErrors)Hun
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 8:34:18 AM EST
[#35]
as a christian all I have to say about the author is:
          I think that about sums it up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 8:35:04 AM EST
[#36]
You too. Although with hookers and blow god is easier to find than with just booze. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 8:44:15 AM EST
[#37]
I just read something that is actually relevent to the topic at hand.
"When the outer world fails to invoke your psychological participation, you turn inward. You can turn inward with peyote, mescaline, LSD, and all of that sort of thing; or you can turn inward with meditation of a different sort." --- Joseph Campbell, Pathways to Bliss: Mythology and Personal Transformation It's not surprising that a person who has no mythology turns to chemical help to find those images which awaken their imagination, awaken their psyche. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:07:15 AM EST
[#38]
So then by evidence and carbon dating the GoT was written at the same time... I can only assume so because that is the evidence presented me. You have offered no counter evidence... GONE!......
I only asked because you asked if I was going to "make something of it"...... THat seems touchy to me...
Fixed it for you! Funny my interpretations on the matter differ greatly than yours.... Suprise Suprise... And to believe that this very same thing does not happen throught history seems a bit naive....
Again fixing it for you.... Talk about going off topic.... I was refering to this as God saying he has no problems with those who choose on ingesting HIS Mushrooms...... Clearly you saw this and are only attempting to throw a red herring here........ OOOH another wild pitch by the Hun.... Looks like the coach is coming out.... I think there may be a pitching change......  |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:29:53 AM EST
[#39]
A massive power and network outage onsite killed my full response to this. In summary, however, basically you did the exact same thing you have always done with scripture, taking it out of context and using it as support for an arguement the Bible does not make. The Bible clearly says drunkenness is a sin. It was a sin when Noah got drunk, it was a sin for the priests to touch fermented wine when serving in the temple, and the New Testament says repeatedly that drunkenness is a sin. Eating a mushroom is not the sin, otherwise everyone who ate portabella mushrooms would be in trouble. Eathing psychadelic mushrooms to get high IS a sin. It is as simple as that. If you approached the Bible AS A WHOLE rather than trying to cut the text until it bleeds, and instead viewed every verse according to the SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY OF THE BIBLE, then you wouldn't have so many inane questions. That, of course, would ruin all your fun, and clearly demonstrate your gnostic heresies to be what they are. So until you have humility enough to toss aside those silly ideas and embrace the true Christ and His word, anything I could say to you is wasted. If you truly believe that we can take from "every tree", then try some hemlock. Then you really WILL see God. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:33:33 AM EST
[#40]
HIJACK HIJACK HIJACK jeeze all this guy wants to know is if you think the ends justified the means and i have to say a resounding YES. so enough with all these long assed paragraaphs just say yes or no- did the ends justify the means?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:34:00 AM EST
[#41]
I think that massive power outage was divine intervention! Of course the bible is systematic thats what the asssemblers wanted... Which is why Matthew and Luke are revised versions of Mark... "If you realize that Matthew and Luke are revised versions of Mark you will see that an extended set of sayings are in Matthew and Luke that do not occur in Mark. Those sayings, it is generally agreed in scholarship, were taken by both Matthew and Luke from a mid-first century document that consisted of a list of Jesus' sayings. That document, which German scholars called "Quelle," has come to be known as Q. It does not exist any longer, but it can be recovered by analysis of Matthew and Luke (simply put, Q was the written list of sayings that we find both in Matthew and Luke but not in Mark). Q was nothing more than a list of sayings. The Gospel of Thomas is also nothing more than a list of sayings. Many of the sayings are the same, but most of the sayings in Thomas are not in Q. Thomas is the same sort of thing as Q was but Thomas is not Q. Probably Thomas and Q circulated separately in the middle or the later part of the first century. Their points of view are quite different, Thomas stresses the presence of the Kingdom of God now. Q insists that the Kingdom of God will arrive at some future time. " Oh and don't forget "of Satan" 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:35:21 AM EST
[#42]
And you were making an arguement that is utterly and completely unsupportable by scripture, because, again you ignore the context and council of the Bible, reading into it what you WANT to see, and in the process twisting the Word into contortions that you will one day have to answer for. Do you really think that when you stand before God, having shredded His word, that you can then plead ignorance of that word? You are making quite a little mess for yourself. You should stop it and get saved. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:43:29 AM EST
[#43]
Why yes, because I am already standing It seems I have found the Ark in Texarkana! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:43:39 AM EST
[#44]
Talk about grasping at straws.
Who were it's "assemblers"? Hmm?
Ah. IF you concede that the universe is made of limburger, then everything will stink! Horse poop. A flawed premise creates a poisonous chain of logic.
General scholarship does NOT agree on this.
Ah. So the two gospels we have are derived from this "mystery" list of sayings that we have ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE OF, and the rest is just stuff that the writers filled in for themselves. The idea of the Q gospel is not new, you know. I have heard this perversion before.
Really? How would anyone know that, seeing as how NOBODY HAS EVER SEEN THIS BLOODY Q GOSPEL?
Again, how the heck do we know that? Nobody has ever seen or read this "Q" gospel.
So Q and Thomas circulated at the same time and yet had WIDELY divergent messages? Then how in blue hell can it be argued that this "Q" gospel that nobody has ever seen lends ANY legitimacy to the Gospel of Thomas in the first place? You are appealing to a writing that is only a hypothesis at best as a "proof" of what the GOT says, and yet in the next breath are saying that the message is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT? And you think MY theology is thin? |
||||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:52:30 AM EST
[#45]
I don't see the message as divergent, You do.... Your asking how I can believe all the things I do when there is no proof. Even when I show you evidence. Can I cop out and call it faith here? Like you do? But its not faith I have... Its experience and "Knowledge" of the divine.....I see a message based on what I discovered inside. A message that rings true with the universe. Thats all I really have. My house IS in order..... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:56:46 AM EST
[#46]
The bloody quote you used SAYS EXPLICITLY that the messages of Q and GOT are completely different. Maybe if you left the church of the Divine Cut and Paste but Never Read, you might actually figure out what in the heck you are talking about. You are enough to make Christ Himself want to cuss. And you have faith but it isn't faith? WHAT KIND OF RETARDED SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY DID YOU GO TO? Good gravy! You make Jehova's Witnesses look SANE. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:58:50 AM EST
[#47]
Relax man its ok.... I know they say it is different but I don't agree.... I see the big picture meaning as the same... Different paths up a mountain..... Church of the divine cut and paste..... I like that... Can I be bishop? Edit to get the rest of your wonderful post!
Well I am an ordained minister.... Did I mention that? All I am saying is that the light of God and his kingdom are here right now within you and you call that "insane?" |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 9:59:51 AM EST
[#48]
Chris |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 10:09:46 AM EST
[#49]
Thanks for the revelation! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2005 10:12:49 AM EST
[#50]
By gosh, you are right! It doesn't say that ANYWHERE!! I hear Socrates had a good recipe for an herb called "Hemlock". Why don't you try it and tell me how it is? If you like it, we can jazz it up with a little Nightshade. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
