Fanatical Christians Continued (Moved)

Custom Search

[Absolutetruth]

First answer, why not read it and find it for yourself ? Are you so incapable of doing such ? Out of your own Bible that you so love ? It is right in front of you. Pick up your Bible. And read it. Post the whole thing if you have to post anything. Then we will all see.

I HAVE been reading them.  and this is what it clearly says.  if you disagree with me (and over 2,000 years of church history and exegesis) then SHOW me how we're wrong.  thanks.

Second. No it aint hard : Like marley said I could explain to a baby and even the baby will overstand. Why you no overstand ? That is the question here.

Genuine questions according to your BELIEF ? Right ? Well those answers above were GENUINE answers according to I and I = the children of the FATHER - not Paul and not Jesus.

where does this idea of the "Father" come to you from and how do you know it's right?  what is that beleif based on?

Simple questions - simple answers. Nice "talking," but not reasoning, with you too.

like i said before, reason is lost on one who understands not.  

Blessings,
Absolute

[lahy-uh-nis]

"The essence of knowledge is, having it, to apply it; not having
it, to confess your ignorance."
- Confucius

[prophet777]

First answer, why not read it and find it for yourself ? Are you so incapable of doing such ? Out of your own Bible that you so love ? It is right in front of you. Pick up your Bible. And read it. Post the whole thing if you have to post anything. Then we will all see.

I HAVE been reading them.  and this is what it clearly says.  if you disagree with me (and over 2,000 years of church history and exegesis) then SHOW me how we're wrong.  thanks.

Second. No it aint hard : Like marley said I could explain to a baby and even the baby will overstand. Why you no overstand ? That is the question here.

Genuine questions according to your BELIEF ? Right ? Well those answers above were GENUINE answers according to I and I = the children of the FATHER - not Paul and not Jesus.

where does this idea of the "Father" come to you from and how do you know it's right?  what is that beleif based on?

Simple questions - simple answers. Nice "talking," but not reasoning, with you too.

like i said before, reason is lost on one who understands not.  

Blessings,
Absolute

You have only picked out/represented part of it (like they do in church) and come to conclusion that that is what it says/means ? You pick out points that apply to your "teachings" but, ignore the rest and that is a conclusion ? That is being delusive to the rest. Is G-ds Word divided ? The rest already shows you where you are wrong - what do you want I to show what is not been shown to you already ? So show I and I where we are wrong with over 200,000 years of natural G-D given history and whatever ?

Where the Idea of I Father comes from ? Well e.g., it existed in I long before I knew any doctrines, church, etc.,etc.,. I knew it was wrong to eat animals or to kill before I knew the Bible, by seeing it with I own eyes. I've seen animals killed by the hand of man and laid as a meal on I table. Something I never participated in from the start as a youth. I've seen mankind being killed for stupid reasons and knew it was wrong without no Bible or church. I've seen crimes committed by many that I knew were wrong and never participated in them for those facts.
I have seen the face of death, through I own personal experience and was saved by the Higher Force before I even knew a church or Bible. I "prayed" (before even knowing what prayer was) to that higher FORCE in that moment and was saved. I knew and felt that there was someone over I and that was I FATHER = THE ONE THAT TOOK CARE OF I before I learned any thing you can represent. That is why I can say, with confidence, (even though I am not perfect, which none of us are) that I knew Him before what you claim and where you claim to have found Him i.e., your Bible.
 
Without further examples - I Father is not to be found in a book. He is the breath of life that is in I. The very same Breath that has made I who I now am. Not to be found in no church and not no Bible but, within I. "Man know thyself." So do not tell I of your Jesus because it was not him I prayed to but, I Father. For I there is a VERY BIG difference. The funny thing is even your Jesus says it but, you do not accept it.

There are many more things I could dwell on but, these above pertain to HIS commandments already and I knew them before any Jesus or Bible told them to I. Now who is greater ? Jesus or the Father ? And do not come with that "they are the same person" because they ain't. What does "trinity" mean to you ?

(continued)

[prophet777]

continued

[prophet777]

Jesus says He is the "way" - to who ? To get to where ? Way =

1.      manner, mode, or fashion.
2.      characteristic or habitual manner.
3.      a method, plan, or means for attaining a goal.
4.      a respect or particular.
5.      a direction or vicinity.
6.      passage or progress on a course.
7.      Often, ways. distance.
8.      a path or course leading from one place to another.
9.      British:
a.      an old Roman or pre-Roman road.
b.      a minor street in a town.
10.      a road, route, passage, or channel (usually used in combination).
11.      Law. a right of way.
12.      any line of passage or travel, used or available.
13.      space for passing or advancing.
14.      Often, ways. a habit or custom.
15.      course or mode of procedure that one chooses or wills.
16.      condition, as to health, prosperity, or the like.
17.      range or extent of experience or notice.
18.      a course of life, action, or experience.

Yes I can agree on those terms that He used i.e., the "WAY/METHOD" to I Father = follow His example = nothing else. Jesus never, directly, ever professed to be the Father Himself. It seems you have translated His words in the wrong manner although you often accuse I of doing so. I guess you use this to do it " I and my Father are one" because you do not understand what underlines that statement. If He and the Father are one as you see it why does He then say not to pray to Him ? If He is the Father as you say He claims to be i.e., as you translate it....?

You are making Jesus greater than He made Himself. So who am I supposed to believe ? Your interpretation of Him, or Jesus Himself ? Who was Jesus crying out to when He said "Eli, Eli, why hast thou forsaken I !?" Himself ? He "forsook" Himself ? Does that make sense ?
What about when John Baptised Him and He came out of the water ? Does it not say the Spirit og God descended like a dove ? And a voice from heaven said "This is my beloved Son,in whom I am well pleased ?" I mean if Jesus is G-D, the Father, then who was talking ?
 

That is where taking part of the scriptures to come to your "conclusions" in order to suit yourself, gets you duped and, believe I, you have been duped - no question about that.

So much to your asking on I to show you where you are wrong in scripture reasoning, translating or whatever you call it. I bet you will still deny it.

Yes I reasoning has been lost on you - true.

prophet7

[NyaInIJahLove]

Love up Breds,
                   Didn't Jesus/Yeshua say
 YOU shall do greater things than I
??
seems like humility was very much a part of his teachings.
I feel his spirit within me and have for some time now and I dont think it matters what title or ideology one has about him, his spirit is in the story and within all who seek him and some who dont, his LOVE is infused in the fabric of Creation and his story is deep in our collective psyche.
The Rastaman imbodies the spirit of christ, just look and you will see........
Blessings and Guidance
NerinYa

[Absolutetruth]

2 Empress

i've finally read what you've said here, and i'm shocked.  it seems as though you did the very thing i wished you wouldn't have done:  answer me according to your false presupposition that i was being condescending in this first line.  sigh...let's see what you have to say below:

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.)

not really, THINK AGAIN.  i wasn't being condescending.  i was being sincere in saying that these were good responses.  but you obviously only want to see what you want to see in order to make things more difficult and have reason to use invectives and expletives, trying to justify your name calling, like calling me "fanatic" and whatever else.  

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!

it's funny how below, you call me a liar, when here, you're ACTUALLY lying in front of everyone, and denying it as well, which is worse.  remember saying this:

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. It is the fanatical christians who can only see the bible as literal, and hold it as their only frame of reference. They may know it backwards and forwards (which is valuable). But if another does not, they find whatever that person is saying to be worthless (which is what blind faith is built upon).  
 
The thing is, the fanatical christian simply cannot see themselves clearly. But as the saying goes, if it looks like a duck...

if you say that you didn't have me in mind as at least ONE of those references of being a "fanatic", then you're lying again.  you can tell me and everyone else here whatever you want, just be real with yourself.  nothing but obliquity from you.  

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?

i'm sorry, but this is just stupid semantics.  you're engaged in senseless argument.  you're actually arguing "he didn't say narrow is the mind, or narrow is the book."  THAT'S your argument???  the MIND is to be INFORMED by the Bible, and the Bible is the Word, and the Word is Christ.  so if Christ is the "Narrow way", then the Bible is the "Narrow book", or the perfect revelation of the "Narrow way".  the mind has nothing to do with the equation in the sense that you've introduced it here.  pure silliness.  

where did Jesus say that we must only refer to the Bible?  since Jesus IS the Word (the ENTIRE Word), he says it here: (2 Cor 10:4-5, Titus 1:9, Colossians 2:8, Galatians 1:8-9).  since we are commanded to reject anything that contradicts God's revelation, He most certainly IS saying that we must refer only to the Bible FOR SALVATION.  you don't understand this because you don't understand the Bible.  plain and simple.  go study biblical theoloy and redemptive history and then come back.

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.

you have YET to quote Christ in the proper context.  you who is so devoid of proper biblical understanding, redemptive history, interpretive principles and hermeneutics are actually accusing ME, one who understands these things to a significant degree, of being wrong, and you being right?  the reason that my quote is contradictory to yours is because YOU'VE GIVEN IT A FALSE INTERPRETATION.  that's why.  so, once again, Christ contradicts YOU, not me or Himself.  

continued..

[Absolutetruth]

Empress

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.

it's a VALID tactic, that's perfectly acceptable in argumentation.  if you have no grounds for asking a question, then why should i be forced to answer it?  here's an example that should help you understand, hopefully.  it's like an athiest arguing against the existence of God because there's too much evil in the world, and demanding that a Christian give an answer for it seeing as how the Christian believes that there's an "all-loving", "all-powerful" God that has created all things.  the Christian can legitimately first ask the atheist (before giving an answer) how the atheist even DEFINES good and evil, and how he even KNOWS what evil is in the first place.  the Christian doesn't have to answer the atheist's question until he first answers the Christian's because without an answer to the question of how one knows what evil is in the first place, then the question of evil as an argument against the existence of God self-destructs because it ASSUMES an absolute standard, which is God Himself!  

but i've been reasoning with my own ideas this whole time.  i don't know what you're talking about.  but if you say something silly and self-defeating, why do i have to say anything?  i'll just use what you said against you and let you argue with yourself .  

well, i know this much:  that you believe some of the Bible, and you disbelieve 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.

well, this is a debated passage that can go either way, but suppose you're right.  suppose it's only referring to Revelation.  tell me, what else might we need to know from following revelation?  what is missing from the 66 books of Scripture that this other "Scripture" you talk about would add?  the Bible begins at the moment of Creation, and ends at the end of Creation and the Re-Creation of the new heavens and new earth, with Christ reigning.  what more needs to be added?  

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.  

exactly.  Jesus' TEACHINGS don't save anyone.  His life, death, and resurrection save.  you try to make an argument here and you failed, miserably.  go back and learn more about the Bible and redemptive history and understanding, and THEN come back and try to reason.  you're not doing a very good job here at all.  

continued...

[Absolutetruth]

Empress

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 have NO idea of what you're talking about.  what you JUST DESCRIBED is Legalism, with a capital "L".  and you call ME a pharisee?  you're trying to work out your own salvation, as if your meager good works of doing all the things you've mentioned will gain you any salvation at all.  but i'm not saying that man doesn't have to "do anything".  YOU said that, not me.  i said that man has no part IN HIS OWN SALVATION.  there's a big difference.  while you're doing "good works" to try and EARN salvation and that's how you view them, we do "good works" in RESPONSE to salvation, out of gratitude and service and love for our Savior.  so there's still a place for all the stuff that you mentioned, but we are not fooled into thinking (as you've been fooled) that we earn or merit anything toward salvation.  to think that way is to only set yourself up to become a self-righteous Pharisee (as we see you CLEARLY identify youself as later).  

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.

of course i'm fearful to do that!  have you not read this:

Jeremiah 17:9
"The heart is decietful above all things, and desperately wicked.  Who can know it?"

go away from the Bible, and you trust in yourself, in your own sinful, idolatrous, wicked heart and mind.  read Romans 1:18-3:20 to see the fulness of man's depravity.  trust in yourself and this is what your left with.  

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.  

you continue to confound and obfuscate issues with this kind of "reasoning".  you told me to be content as Paul.  i asked you to show me where he was ever content with error being attributed to the Gospel.  so i'll be as content as Paul was in every area but the Gospel.  your vain attempts at argumentation are very telling.

Continued...

[Absolutetruth]

Empress

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.

well, you said you quoted Christ when you said this:  

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 where'd you quote Him at?  but, anyway, since you haven't quoted the Bible much (i suspect because you're terribly unfamiliar with it), i'll simply point out the fact that many of the passages that I'VE quoted, you've misinterpreted, and i've demonstrated that to you again and again.  

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.

yeah, when you challenge God's Word, you challenge God since all Scripture is God-breathed, and that nothing shall pass from the Law until all is fulfilled.  once again, you need to UNDERSTAND the Bible before attempting to make arguments from it.

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!!!

you're perfect???  you've NEVER told a lie?  you've NEVER sinned against God or your neighbor???  you've never been angry with someone???  this is the mind of the self-righteous Pharisee (funny because it's YOU that called ME that Pharisee).  

so, you say you're perfect huh?  let's see what God's Word says about you, and all of us:

1 John 1:8
"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."

James 2:10
"For whoever keeps the whole law, and yet stumbles in one point, he is guilty of all."  

Romans 1:29-31
29They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

there.  do you STILL see yourself as perfect???  do not be deceived.  

Continued...

[Absolutetruth]

Empress

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.

Actually, this is the consistency! And it is why I know that Jah's revelation is not ONLY found in the Bible. How could it be, since fallen sinful men wrote it? But also, spiritual, ideal men wrote it too! That tells me I better listen not only to the bible, but also listen to the wind, which is perfection! I better also listen to my ancestors and elders, who are perfection! I better listen to the heart and mind, which The Most High gave us all, as they are perfection!! So your "zenith" is really just a basis for your lack of overstanding.

you CLEARLY ignored my point that you weren't able to intelligently respond to.  my point was that you talk about trusting what Christ says, but not the other writings because they were written by sinful men, but the writings of Christ were written by those same men as well!  so why would you trust the writings of some sinful men, but not the writings of other sinful men.  THERE'S the inconsistency!  

now, the wind?  perfection???  are you serious???  i can say that too, and say that the "wind" told me that we should trust only the Bible, and that Empress is wrong and needs to change her thinking.  how would you know that i was wrong?  you'd be gambling.  my interpretation of the wind would be just as valid as yours.  i've given you passages that show that NO ONE is perfect, but Christ.  so these "ancestors" of yours, were nothing but fallen sinful people just like us.  don't look to them for anything.  Look to Christ.  and the heart and mind i've already given you passages as well concerning the fact that they are unreliable and fallen.  you can't trust them.  they aren't perfection as you falsely claim.  they are frustrated and fallen and affected by sin.  get it straight.  

so my "zenith" (clearly you don't even understand what the word means), remains intact.  you keep looking for guidance from the very things that the Bible specifically say NOT TO LOOK TO!

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.  

You're welcome.

Be blessed

[/quote]

Absolute

[EmpressCarla]

Blessings

@AbTruth
It seems idren woke up on the condescending side of the bed this morning. No worries, it happens. It's just somewhat sad that you refuse to see and admit it. You say you weren't being condescending to me, then you do things like call me "silly" and say that I am engaging in "stupid semantics." Ummm, ok.

You can't help it, as you said you are a low and weary sinner. How sad for you.

As I have said before, there is no point in dealing with you, so I am done.

Be blessed

[Absolutetruth]

Blessings

@AbTruth
It seems idren woke up on the condescending side of the bed this morning. No worries, it happens. It's just somewhat sad that you refuse to see and admit it. You say you weren't being condescending to me, then you do things like call me "silly" and say that I am engaging in "stupid semantics." Ummm, ok.

You can't help it, as you said you are a low and weary sinner. How sad for you.

As I have said before, there is no point in dealing with you, so I am done.

Be blessed

Actually, I was a little vexed at how you responded to me, so I was just responding in the same tone as you did.  

And I wasn't being condescending in those instances.  I was just stating what I saw to be the reality.  They WERE stupid semantics, and the argumentation WAS silly.  Sorry, but it was.  But you were equally rude with me, so I don't wanna hear it.  If you want me to point out where, I'll gladly do it.  

But you're a sinner too, don't forget it.  Not just me.  Remember those passages I quoted for you.  Anyone who says they don't have sin calls God a liar.  

Absolute

[Rasta Nick]

Actually, I was a little vexed at how you responded to me, so I was just responding in the same tone as you did.  
 
And I wasn't being condescending in those instances.  I was just stating what I saw to be the reality.  They WERE stupid semantics, and the argumentation WAS silly.  Sorry, but it was.  But you were equally rude with me, so I don't wanna hear it.  If you want me to point out where, I'll gladly do it.  
 
But you're a sinner too, don't forget it.  Not just me.  Remember those passages I quoted for you.  Anyone who says they don't have sin calls God a liar.  
 
Absolute

- Actually none of this has anything to do with learning about Rasta and your presence here has become a constant annoyance. You are no longer welcome here.