Fanatical Christians Continued (Moved)

Custom Search

[Absolutetruth]

My apologies for starting this up again.  I would love to have just closed it at that last post by EmpressCarla, but that last post wasn't exactly fair and was full of presuppositions.

Empress Carla said:
Blessings
 

It seems some of InI need a refresher course on the proper perspective when reasoning. Please check this thread, if you would be so kind:  
 
http://forums.rasta-man.co.uk/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1158238570/0#0
 
With regard to the "fanatical christians" mentioned in the original post: it is the fanatical christians that come here who seem to always feel they have the absolute truth. And because of this, they tend to not simply reason their point, but to condescend the reasonings of others also.

oh, is that the "absolute truth"??  But when others condescend to me, it's fine?  and when others (you guys) speak as though you know the truth (which all of you, inevitably, whether you realize it or not, do), it's supposed to be fine?  this whole post, is this supposed to be "true"?  if so, then are you imposing your "truth" on me??

It is the fanatical christians who can only see the bible as literal,

oh, is that also an "absolute truth"??  but i agree, which is why those of us who are NOT fanatical Christians, don't see whole Bible as literal.  we understand it according to genre and hermeneutics.  this is another strawman that doesn't pertain to me because i don't take the whole Bible as literal.

and hold it as their only frame of reference. They may know it backwards and forwards (which is valuable).

oh, is it "absolutely true" that it's valuable to know the Bible "backwards and forwards"??  but, what SHOULD be our point of reference?  the ideas of fallen sinful men?  and how is it valuable to know it "backwards and forwards" if it's not completely true?  

But if another does not, they find whatever that person is saying to be worthless (which is what blind faith is built upon).

is that also "absolutely true"??  but, we do no such thing (the non fanatical ones of us anyway).  if someone is USING Scripture, then it's our duty to correct them when they go astray (Titus 1:9).  we don't say that anything that is not Scripture is unimportant.  we're saying that anything that contradicts it, especially at the point of salvation, is dangerous and is unacceptable.  

but blind faith isn't built upon that.  blind faith is called "fideism".  our faith is historical and is based on history, not some mystical experience, or feeling that we profess to have been given.

The thing is, the fanatical christian simply cannot see themselves clearly. But as the saying goes, if it looks like a duck...

oh, is it "absolutely true" that Christians "cannot see themselves clearly"??
 

All are welcome to reason here at Rasta Nick's forum, as long as the reasoning is RASpectable.  

is it "RASpectable" to impugn the ideas of the Bible that i'm putting forth here?  is it "RASpectable" to call me lost and a liar and confused, and to make those same charges against God's very Word?

InI should ask Iselves, what is the point of our reasoning here?

my reason for being here is to have some good discussions, meet people, learn more about Rastafari and excercise my mind by discussing ideas.

Who is served by it? Both Jesus and Saul/Paul cautioned against being boastful and proud, and against doing things for our own glory and justification rather than to the glory of The Most High.

they also said that anyone who is not in Christ is destined for eternal death and fire.  do you take that "literal" too, or do you throw that out with all the other parts you disbelieve?

Sadly, it seems the "fanatical christians" follow their god Jesus' admonishments the least.

actually, it's those who reject the Bible that pick and choose what to believe based on their own preferences and reject anything that makes them uncomfortable.  but you're appealing to Law here, which doesn't save anyone.  it's pointless to follow His Laws if the NT is wrong about the facts.
 

I am closing this thread, because Nick's original post was sufficient. And also because this thread was a closed one before the upgrade anyway. The last few posts have gotten way off topic. So take it up in another thread...if you must.

all jokes aside, i appreciate your approach here, and i know you are trying to be sincere and genial, which is wonderful, but not much of the above is correct.  all you're doing is telling me that it's wrong or "fanatical" to claim to have the "absolute truth" all the while you make several "absolute truth" claims yourself.  all you're doing is trading one truth for another, which is simply question-begging.  I appreciate your response, but i think better reasoning should be put forth instead of falsely accusing me of the same things that the accuser is guilty of as well.

Blessings,
Absolute

[EmpressCarla]

Blessings

@AbTruth
Idren, your post is very immature. So much so that I did not bother to read all of it, because as I read I saw how you were projecting, inventing and all around making much more out of what I wrote. My comments in the other thread were not solely directed at you, nor was it a play on your name. But even if it were, don't you have enough self-esteem to take your lumps and keep going??? If you truly "would love to have just closed it at that last post by EmpressCarla" then why didn't you?

If you are here to reason, then simply do so. No one is stopping you. The proof of which is that you haven't been banned, or even warned of it. I will however, refer you to the rules in hopes that you will slow your roll and take heed. Personally I care very little what you believe or profess, or how important the bible is to you. My faith is not in a book, but in the Most High, who has provided MANY books (including the bible), many people, and even the wind to instruct me as to how to live in Love. If what you belief is sufficient, then do like Saul/Paul and be content! Stop whining!

Be blessed

[EmpressCarla]

Blessings

I did go back and read AbTruth's post and WOW is all I can think to write. I am quite amazed. So I'll just say this and be done with it: let us all Itinue to reason in Love and Light. Nuff said.

Be blessed

[Ash-Tree]

Fire Fire Fire, Respect Carla .

[Absolutetruth]

Blessings

@AbTruth
Idren, your post is very immature. So much so that I did not bother to read all of it, because as I read I saw how you were projecting, inventing and all around making much more out of what I wrote.

i simply quoted you and responded.  if you're telling me that it's fanatical to claim to have the "absolute truth", then when you use such truths, is it not fair for me to point out the inconsistency? but it's too bad you didn't read it all, cuz at the end i said "all joking aside..."

My comments in the other thread were not solely directed at you, nor was it a play on your name. But even if it were, don't you have enough self-esteem to take your lumps and keep going???

if they truly were lumps, i would have no problem taking them.  i've taken some before, and i'll gladly take them again.  i won't take false claims and bad reasoning though.  that's not fair.

If you truly "would love to have just closed it at that last post by EmpressCarla" then why didn't you?

probably my selfish, prideful nature to be honest, but i don't like leaving things up in the air when i've just been horribly misrepresented and bad reasoning has been used against me.  i'll point it out everytime.  nothing against you, you seem nice, but i can't let those things slide.  sorry.

If you are here to reason, then simply do so. No one is stopping you.

i'm trying to.

The proof of which is that you haven't been banned, or even warned of it. I will however, refer you to the rules in hopes that you will slow your roll and take heed.

the rules of conduct prohibit genuine questions (you didn't answer one question that i asked you)??  they also prohibit meaningful responses?

Personally I care very little what you believe or profess, or how important the bible is to you.

i see that.

My faith is not in a book, but in the Most High, who has provided MANY books (including the bible)

do you not find it strange that the Bible is at odds, theologically and philosophically, with ALL other "inspired" books ever written??  if they all came from him, then how is it that they all teach radically different things?

, many people, and even the wind to instruct me as to how to live in Love. If what you belief is sufficient, then do like Saul/Paul and be content! Stop whining!

i didn't for the same reason that you weren't content and felt the need to respond to me.  but Paul was talking about being content physically regarding posessions and material things.  they were never content with error being attributed to God's Word.  so i'll take your advice, i'll do like Jesus and Paul and i'll challenge those who contradict (Titus 1:9).  like i said before, how do you take some of their teaching, but not the rest?

Be blessed

thank you.  i really don't mean to be a jerk here, i really don't.  but when certain things are said, i like to discuss them to see if they stand up.  i'm not being sarcastic or anything with these questions.  i'd really like to know how you respond to them, because the ideas being raised don't seem to be too consistent.  

if you want to answer some of the questions, i'd really appreciate it.  if not, then i guess we'll just end this right here.

Blessings,
Absolute

[Absolutetruth]

Fire Fire Fire, Respect Carla .

yeah, because "Fire" and "respect" simply go hand in hand right? .

Blessings,
Absolute

[EmpressCarla]

Blessings

"my reason for being here is to have some good discussions, meet people, learn more about Rastafari and excercise my mind by discussing ideas."
Seen, if that is true then that is true.

"oh, is it "absolutely true" that it's valuable to know the Bible "backwards and forwards"??"
When is knowledge not valuable???

"but, what SHOULD be our point of reference?  the ideas of fallen sinful men?  and how is it valuable to know it "backwards and forwards" if it's not completely true?"
My point of reference is not as narrow as yours. I see Jah in all things. His wisedome is as infinite as the Iniverse. How can it be comprised in one book??? How can InI ever know all of the unknown? Such views are limiting.

"we don't say that anything that is not Scripture is unimportant.  we're saying that anything that contradicts it, especially at the point of salvation, is dangerous and is unacceptable."
Again, your view is narrow. Mine is not. Christ said to seek and we would find. Jah Jah's children will never go astray as long as they use the mind He gave them. As Tree wrote in another thread, Jah gave us a wonderful gift called "common sense."

"but blind faith isn't built upon that.  blind faith is called "fideism".  our faith is historical and is based on history, not some mystical experience, or feeling that we profess to have been given."
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't konw what the word fideism means. I know blind faith to be when one follows something fervently, even when it defies natural and universal laws, or even basic common sense. Oh, and you should not underestimate "mystical experiences."  

"oh, is it "absolutely true" that Christians "cannot see themselves clearly"??"
This is a misrepresentation of what I said and you know it! Please stop that.

"is it "RASpectable" to impugn the ideas of the Bible that i'm putting forth here?  is it "RASpectable" to call me lost and a liar and confused, and to make those same charges against God's very Word?"
No it's not. Who did/said all those things to you? Certainly wasn't me, so I don't overstand why you're bringing your personal baggage into this conversation.

"they also said that anyone who is not in Christ is destined for eternal death and fire.  do you take that "literal" too, "
First off, you stating this as response to what I said in no way changes the value of what I said. It would have been better for you to meditate on my words than to respond with this. Why did you not respond to what I wrote rather than attempting to divert back to me? And to answer the question, yes those of InI who do not live in truth are damned.

"or do you throw that out with all the other parts you disbelieve?"
How do you know what I believe/disbelieve???

"actually, it's those who reject the Bible that pick and choose what to believe based on their own preferences and reject anything that makes them uncomfortable.  but you're appealing to Law here, which doesn't save anyone.  it's pointless to follow His Laws if the NT is wrong about the facts."
What Law did I appeal to??? I was speaking of Jesus' teachings.

"all you're doing is telling me that it's wrong or "fanatical" to claim to have the "absolute truth" all the while you make several "absolute truth" claims yourself."
I did no such thing. I made no claims of absolute truth, neither did I tell you "it's wrong." Where you gettin' all that from??? Perhaps you have encountered ones in the past who've told you such things. I did not, so please pay better attention to the person you're addressing!

Be blessed

[EmpressCarla]

Blessings

Part 2

"the rules of conduct prohibit genuine questions (you didn't answer one question that i asked you)??  they also prohibit meaningful responses?"

I didn't answer your questions at first because there were so many and because they seemed to be rhetorical because they were provoked by negative emotion.

"do you not find it strange that the Bible is at odds, theologically and philosophically, with ALL other "inspired" books ever written??  if they all came from him, then how is it that they all teach radically different things?"

I have not found that to be true, that the Bible is at odds with other inspired books or ideas. Different cultures will warrant different ways of being, but the overall message of faith is to know that there is an Almighty Creator and that Love is the Highest Spirit, and that we are One with that Spirit of Love if/when we choose to be. So if there is contradiction, it is not in Jah's Word (wherever it may be found), it is in man's interpretations of it when he is as you say you are: "selfish" and "prideful".

"i didn't for the same reason that you weren't content and felt the need to respond to me. "

No, you responded out of your "selfish, prideful nature" (your own words). I rasponded for your edification. If it was not received as such, so be it. But my rasponse was not out of selfishness or pride or discontent. Again, you are projecting.
 
"but Paul was talking about being content physically regarding posessions and material things.  they were never content with error being attributed to God's Word.  so i'll take your advice, i'll do like Jesus and Paul and i'll challenge those who contradict (Titus 1:9)."  

Paul was speaking about being content in whatsoever state he was in. WHATSOEVER. How do you know he wasn't speaking of a mental state as well as physical state? And where has God's word been given in error? The context of all of this is the fanatical christians thread and specifically my comments in it. So please tell me where I delivered God's word and did so incorrectly? If you are challenging errors to "God's Word", then you are fighting a battle in your own mind.

"like i said before, how do you take some of their teaching, but not the rest?"

What makes you think I don't take all of Christ's teachings? But as for Paul, he was not the Christ. And according to your Christian doctrine he was a man, "a fallen man". So why shouldn't I take what he has to say with a grain of salt? To believe and follow what does not ring true in spirit is foolishness. Isn't the Holy Spirit a discerner?

"i'd really like to know how you respond to them, because the ideas being raised don't seem to be too consistent."

The inconsistency is only in your own perception, idren. It is your perception that I was unfair to you, or that my post was directed at you alone. I merely spoke of "fanatical christians." If you are not one, why did you even bother to respond in defense? The message shouldn't have been for you then, right? Perhaps it's time to self-check.  

Be blessed

[Absolutetruth]

there we go.  these are some good responses.  let's see:

When is knowledge not valuable???

i didn't say it wasn't, i was just pointing out how many times you appeal to truth claims, when you call me a fanatic for doing the same thing.

My point of reference is not as narrow as yours. I see Jah in all things. His wisedome is as infinite as the Iniverse. How can it be comprised in one book??? How can InI ever know all of the unknown? Such views are limiting.

well, the easy answer is that truth is always narrow and exclusive.  Christ Himself said "Narrow is the gate" (Matthew 7:13-14, Luke 13:22-24).  i'm sure you're familiar with those verses.  so who should we believe, this philosophy that you're talking about, or Christ?  

Again, your view is narrow. Mine is not. Christ said to seek and we would find. Jah Jah's children will never go astray as long as they use the mind He gave them. As Tree wrote in another thread, Jah gave us a wonderful gift called "common sense."

Christ also said that no one can come to Him unless the Father draws him (regenerates him) in John 6.  so again, you're contradicting the words of Christ who said that salvation is through the narrow gate.  

That is a misrepresentation of what i said.  Please stop that!

actually it's not a misrepresentation of what you said.  it was a statement that was given as the truth.  i was just pointing out the inconsistency.  i'll stop though.

No it's not. Who did/said all those things to you? Certainly wasn't me, so I don't overstand why you're bringing your personal baggage into this conversation.

you're right.  that's my fault.  i was stating that as though you were representing the others i've been talking with here.  my fault.  

First off, you stating this as response to what I said in no way changes the value of what I said. It would have been better for you to meditate on my words than to respond with this. Why did you not respond to what I wrote rather than attempting to divert back to me?

well, the way i responded was using the "Challenge-Riposte" method.  you probably don't understand that method, so you're not aware of its validity of reverting the original questioner back to their own presuppositions to show that the very foundation for asking the question or making the challenge isn't even valid in the first place.  check it out sometime.  

How do you know what I believe/disbelieve???

well, i know this much:  that you believe some of the Bible, and you disbeleive the rest (as evidenced by your ideas so far).  a quick example of this is your appeal to other books as "Scripture" (or whatever you want to call them) a clear rejection of Revelation 22:18-19.  

What Law did I appeal to??? I was speaking of Jesus' teachings.

Jesus' teachings WERE Law.  this comes froma lack of understanding of biblical theology.  there's two different kinds of doctrine in the Bible, Law and Gospel.  Imperatives, and Indicatives.  Jesus teaching about love God and love neighbor is LAW.  no one can conform perfectly to that which means that those commandments condemn us all because none of us can keep them perfectly.

I did no such thing. I made no claims of absolute truth, neither did I tell you "it's wrong."

that right there is an absolute truth claim.  you're saying it's absolutely true that you made no claims of truth.  we all make truth claims.  just admit it and we can get on instead of being stuck on misunderstandings.

Where you gettin' all that from???

i just told you where.

Perhaps you have encountered ones in the past who've told you such things. I did not, so please pay better attention to the person you're addressing!

done.  i was.  i've been paying close attention.

[Absolutetruth]

Blessings

Part 2

I have not found that to be true, that the Bible is at odds with other inspired books or ideas.

this comes from a lack of understanding of the Bible and other books altogether.  you name the book, and i'll show you how it's different.  every other book of "Scripture" is legalistic, where man is working out his own salvation.  the Bible is the only one where man has NO PART in his own salvation.  it's all God.  

Different cultures will warrant different ways of being, but the overall message of faith is to know that there is an Almighty Creator and that Love is the Highest Spirit, and that we are One with that Spirit of Love if/when we choose to be. So if there is contradiction, it is not in Jah's Word (wherever it may be found), it is in man's interpretations of it when he is as you say you are: "selfish" and "prideful".

you don't see a contradiction because you don't have a clear understanding of the Bible in the first place.  the Bible isn't a book of morals that tells us how to live and how to have a better and more peaceful life.  from beginning to end, the Bible is about one thing:  God redeeming a people for Himself, through the person and work of Jesus Christ.  anything that contradicts that (which you'll find EVERY other "Holy" book doing) shows that they are all different.

No, you responded out of your "selfish, prideful nature" (your own words). I rasponded for your edification. If it was not received as such, so be it. But my rasponse was not out of selfishness or pride or discontent. Again, you are projecting.

i'm not projecting.  i'm simply saying that i chose to respond just as you did:  because you wanted to.  
 

Paul was speaking about being content in whatsoever state he was in. WHATSOEVER. How do you know he wasn't speaking of a mental state as well as physical state?

ok, he was speaking in a mental state too.  but that's STILL not dealing with Truth or God's Word.  you find me one place in the Bible where Paul even SLIGHTLY allows for compromise on the Gospel and on Salvation, and i'll completely forfeit my whole position here and i'll leave everyone alone.  

And where has God's word been given in error? The context of all of this is the fanatical christians thread and specifically my comments in it. So please tell me where I delivered God's word and did so incorrectly? If you are challenging errors to "God's Word", then you are fighting a battle in your own mind.

basically, everywhere that you have quoted God's Word has been erroneous.  also, you appeal to other books, which means that the Bible isn't sufficient, which means that it's lacking something, even though it claims to be complete.  that's attributing error to the Bible right there.

What makes you think I don't take all of Christ's teachings?

well then, do you take this teaching of Christ to be true also:  Matthew 5:48 "Therefore, you shall be perfect even as your Father in Heaven is perfect"?  Jesus is here saying that the only way to be accepted is to be as perfect as God.  now, you, knowing your sin and knowing how you've broken God's Law time and time again (as we all have), how can anyone be saved if this is true?  

But as for Paul, he was not the Christ. And according to your Christian doctrine he was a man, "a fallen man". So why shouldn't I take what he has to say with a grain of salt? To believe and follow what does not ring true in spirit is foolishness. Isn't the Holy Spirit a discerner?

and here we have the zenith of the faulty reasoning that i've been talking about.  let me ask you this:  who WROTE the Gospels of Christ???  were they not "fallen men" also???  the same kind of person that gave us Paul's writings (a fallen sinful man) gave us the teachings of Christ as well (fallen sinful men).  so why do you have confidence in one and not the other???  this is the exact kind of inconsistency that i'm talking about.

The inconsistency is only in your own perception, idren.

not really.  i hope i've shown at least some of that here.

It is your perception that I was unfair to you, or that my post was directed at you alone.

i ddin't say it was "to me alone".  but you did make some clear attacks on me though.

I merely spoke of "fanatical christians." If you are not one, why did you even bother to respond in defense? The message shouldn't have been for you then, right? Perhaps it's time to self-check.  

you practically called me out by name, saying that people who claim "absolute truths" are fanatical (which is what you feel that i've been doing).  so don't give me that stuff please.  i don't mind if you were directing some of that at me, that's fine.  i just hope you don't mind the response to it, that's all.

thanks for answering my questions.  in all honesty, i appreciate it.  that was cool of you to do so we could clarify a couple of things.  

take care.

Blessings,
Absolute

[NyaInIJahLove]

AB
May I suggest bro,that u go and smoke a big spliff, and meditate in nature for a while and then come back and see if maybe u are more on a RAsta wavelength?
Of course u are free to reject this suggestion, but the I might find one gets further on a RASta forum board if one tries this approach.
B.t.w, might I sucumb to the temptation of using the intellectualized logic that u 'cleverly" employ and say.....that if u choose NOT to heed my suggestion, then that PROVES u are wrong, in that we DO have free will (or am I getting confused? was it u that said we have no free will?)
Quote from Winston Rodney(Burning Spear)-
the only free man is a Rasta man

Love and Humouress affection
we are all just reasoning right?
get used to it mate (Aussieism) we are Human, we're gonna get it wrong a lot of the time
Ites
Nerinya

[NyaInIJahLove]

oops, I think I just put my foot in my mouth with that last post
The last bit of yrs AB was quite humble and cool and mine sounds condescending and "point scory" yuck, I dont like coming across that way.
apologies for that.......
I think scriptural debate is quite valid but too much of it does my head in, too confusing for me....I do appreciate the rigors of well read debate tho, I'm sure I learn somethings from it, even if it just inspires me to read the Books more
Jahlove and Oneness
Nerinya

[EmpressCarla]

there we go.  these are some good responses.  let's see:

And here again is the condescension by the fanatic! Which you really should work on. (Your god Jesus was humble and you really should try better to follow in his footsteps.)

i didn't say it wasn't, i was just pointing out how many times you appeal to truth claims, when you call me a fanatic for doing the same thing.

Idren never once did I call you a fanatic (until this post). But again, if it looks like a duck, then quack quack!

well, the easy answer is that truth is always narrow and exclusive.  Christ Himself said "Narrow is the gate" (Matthew 7:13-14, Luke 13:22-24).  i'm sure you're familiar with those verses.  so who should we believe, this philosophy that you're talking about, or Christ?  

I totally agree with what Jesus said, that narrow is the WAY. But he didn't say narrow is the mind or narrow is the book, now did he? So what is your point? We were discussing the bible being the only point of reference. Where did Jesus say we must only refer to the bible?

Christ also said that no one can come to Him unless the Father draws him (regenerates him) in John 6.  so again, you're contradicting the words of Christ who said that salvation is through the narrow gate.  

LOL, you're just going around in circles and double-talking. I guess this is your point, huh? To wear me down with your false logic? If I quote Christ (in the proper context) and then you make another quote by Christ that you say is contradictory to my quote, then what you're really saying is not that I am contradictory. It's that CHRIST IS!!!! So rather than refuting me with Christ's words, you really should think before you answer. Your Challenge-Ripistle approach is just a game, not a call to reasoning.

well, the way i responded was using the "Challenge-Riposte" method.  you probably don't understand that method, so you're not aware of its validity of reverting the original questioner back to their own presuppositions to show that the very foundation for asking the question or making the challenge isn't even valid in the first place.  check it out sometime.  

This is just a tactic. It dodges around and is not the goal of any real reasoning, which is what you said you were here to do. Because you have to use such tactics and not reason on your own and with your own mind and heart and ideas, then I conclude that you are simply on an ego trip.

well, i know this much:  that you believe some of the Bible, and you disbeleive the rest (as evidenced by your ideas so far).  a quick example of this is your appeal to other books as "Scripture" (or whatever you want to call them) a clear rejection of Revelation 22:18-19.  

More lies and ridiculousness. That scripture you're quoting is referring to adding to or taking away from the book of revelations. You should really try to learn to read things IN their context and not change it to suit your beLIEfs.

Jesus' teachings WERE Law.  this comes froma lack of understanding of biblical theology.  there's two different kinds of doctrine in the Bible, Law and Gospel.  Imperatives, and Indicatives.  Jesus teaching about love God and love neighbor is LAW.  no one can conform perfectly to that which means that those commandments condemn us all because none of us can keep them perfectly.

More double-talk. Previously you said, "but you're appealing to Law here, which doesn't save anyone." So according to you, Jesus' teachings (since they were law) doesn't save anyone. OK, thanks for clearing that up.  

Be blessed

[Molliebaz]

Wow.  I am going to be controversial here and ask: are we all losing the plot ? What must people be thinking of RastafarI when they read the postings on this site.  How inviting must it seem to potential new members ?  All this ripping each other to pieces and trying to force ideas, ideals and beliefs down peoples throats is not Rastas way.   I associate with a lot of the rasta community in London and it may surprise you that many of these who have trod the path of RastafarI for many many years find that the teachings and behaviour of this site is so far departed from the true Rasta way that the site might as well change its name.  I am not referring to the likes of people who sit night after night on their pc without being in the real world and who may be playing around at the idea of Rasta for a while as a way of expressing themselves or to follow fashion.  The people I know live RastafarIs ways and have done so for many many years - musicians who have toured world wide  playing The Kings Music for many years, people who have built up sound systems and are internationally known and respected.

Please, can we return to a way of reasoning, showing love for one another, proving that we are all children of Jah and the philosophy of One Love.  A lot of righteous people have stopped contributing to this site, lets not frighten off anybody else, and remember that the site is called rastaman.co.uk - let us bring honour to the Almighty.  By their fruits you will know them.....................

[EmpressCarla]

this comes from a lack of understanding of the Bible and other books altogether.  you name the book, and i'll show you how it's different.  every other book of "Scripture" is legalistic, where man is working out his own salvation.  the Bible is the only one where man has NO PART in his own salvation.  it's all God.  

I don't need to quote any books. You are the one who is against the notion that Jah can speak to and teach InI in more ways than just the Bible. And how is it that man has no part in his own salvation? If this is true, then one need not live in accordance with Jesus' teachings, because that would mean that man does have to do certain things. This is where the Jesus Christian's (or maybe in your case I should say Pauline Christian's) dogma falls short. The problem for you is that by only following what your pastor tells you and choosing not to exercise that brain of yours is that you are decieved into believing that you don't have to do anything. We all have things to do: heal the sick, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, care for the children. To love thy neighbor is a directive from the Most High. In fact, one can't truly say they Love Jah unless they first show love for their fellow man. So it is incorrect and flawed on the part of you Jesus/Pauline Christians to assert that man has nothing to do.

you don't see a contradiction because you don't have a clear understanding of the Bible in the first place.  the Bible isn't a book of morals that tells us how to live and how to have a better and more peaceful life.  from beginning to end, the Bible is about one thing:  God redeeming a people for Himself, through the person and work of Jesus Christ.  anything that contradicts that (which you'll find EVERY other "Holy" book doing) shows that they are all different.

The only real contradiction one might find is this notion that Jesus is the only way. This is the lack of overstanding that YOU have. You see, you cannot step outside of the Bible in order to validate the theory that Jesus is Lord to be worshipped. For if you did step out of the bible, you'd have to use your own mind and heart. But you seem fearful to do that.

i'm not projecting.  i'm simply saying that i chose to respond just as you did:  because you wanted to.

 
No, as you said you responded out of selfish pride.
 

ok, he was speaking in a mental state too.  but that's STILL not dealing with Truth or God's Word.  you find me one place in the Bible where Paul even SLIGHTLY allows for compromise on the Gospel and on Salvation, and i'll completely forfeit my whole position here and i'll leave everyone alone.  

But! But! But!! I just showed you the incorrect context of your scripture quoting and you gloss over it and change the context of what we were discussing. I never claimed that Paul didn't defend the so-called God's word, you brought that up. Now you ask me to show you where it's not the case?? Where are you going with this stuff? I told you to be content, as Paul said he was. And you proceeded to try to discredit my statement. I just showed you that my statement was accurate, and you agreed. Now you're asking me to show you something else, all as a distraction and to go round and round.  

basically, everywhere that you have quoted God's Word has been erroneous.

I asked you to show me where. If you cannot do so, then you are a liar.

also, you appeal to other books, which means that the Bible isn't sufficient, which means that it's lacking something, even though it claims to be complete.  that's attributing error to the Bible right there.

Attributing error to the Bible is not attributing error to God. And I never attributed error to the bible anyway. That is just another false claim you make. Again, you are the one here who sees the bible as the be all to end all. Not me. If that is your position, then I can see why your limited understanding cannot fathom what I'm speaking about. If you are trapped inside the bible, while i am not, then never will we reach mutual overstanding. No worries, though.

well then, do you take this teaching of Christ to be true also:  Matthew 5:48 "Therefore, you shall be perfect even as your Father in Heaven is perfect"?  Jesus is here saying that the only way to be accepted is to be as perfect as God.  now, you, knowing your sin and knowing how you've broken God's Law time and time again (as we all have), how can anyone be saved if this is true?

Yes, InI are perfect and perfecting, as creation is on-going. Jesus knew exactly what he was talking about, and I know exactly what he meant. You don't. (Idren you really should try to know your own god better.) With regard to breaking God's Law, you've already conceded that the Law cannot save us. So us breaking and keeping the law is/was never the point. Religion was always meant to lead us to Spirituality. This is the heart of man that Jesus taught about. You just don't see it. Stop following Paul!!

To be Itinued...