All Religions Will One Day Be Reduced To Symbols And Trinkets (hell, Islam)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What % of these Christians believe Jesus died for our sins? The vast majority, wouldn't you say? Anyone who doesn't simply can't read, or has been deceived the Satan.
I think you're missing the point. Ok everyone believes Jesus died for their sins. Apparently everyone who believes this has the "holy spirit" inside of them.
How do people who all have the same supposed spirit inside them guiding them come to different conclusions about the same thing?
I mean, if even humans can come to a consensus and agree on certain issues, certainly a divine spirit from god would be able to keep everyone on the same page so as not to have them be led astray?
I accept all beliefs and religions. It's when people try to shove there beliefs, or lack of, down my throat that gets my goat.
Spiritul things cannot be proven unless you are spiritually minded. If you deny that which you came from, it cannot ever be proven to yourself. The self is what you should be interested in and not what others think or believe. If I'm the only one in the world who believes something, I have no problems with the rest denying that which I believe is real.
I get along with all people from all walks of life. I have athiest, baptist, catholic, hindu and christian friends. I've listened to them all and agree with some but not all of the beliefs. I don't tell them they are wrong even when we don't agree. I listen and ponder. If it feels right to my soul, I will use that in my life.
No where do I ever ask someone to prove something just because I disagree. Proof is in the pudding. If you want to experience what I have experienced for yourself, you are more than welcome to try but don't say it's not real just because you don't want to taste the pudding.
Remember, Jesus was the only one to believe the way He did until He showed the apostles the same thing. The proof was always in His soul and not of the material. When they felt it within, they believed. Before then, they disbelieved.
I think you're missing the point. Ok everyone believes Jesus died for their sins. Apparently everyone who believes this has the "holy spirit" inside of them.
How do people who all have the same supposed spirit inside them guiding them come to different conclusions about the same thing?
I mean, if even humans can come to a consensus and agree on certain issues, certainly a divine spirit from god would be able to keep everyone on the same page so as not to have them be led astray?
The basis of Christianity is Jesus' redemptive work on the cross. That's why the cross is our symbol. Virtually all Christians believe this.
The denominations occur because of differences of opinion in doctrine (baptism, is salvation permanent, will all or only some be saved, election, etc.). Other, more minor differences are: style of worship, style of music, selection of deacons/elders, etc.
I'll stand up and vouch for Reverend1111 being a lot more open-minded than you'd expect. Rev has a gentle and free-thinking way of approaching christianity and never has a bad word to say to anyone.
If so, then you don't have an open mind as you believe that only your experience is valid. You are a fraud.
I have to disagree on that one. Rev doesn't tell anyone else how they should think, and is only speaking in regard to personal belief, not anyone else's discrete experiences.
This being said...who should we take the words of?...someone who was not living at the time of the events, or other than the one putting his hands into the wounds of the one no one believes in?...that would be naive...I'd say.
For if one (living now)does not believe in what was before him...then his words will not speak of the truth that did occur...be it in front of his eyes, or not....and what comes after him...is foretold...and is revealing itself right now...before his return....so if we see the signs of his coming, then we know he was, he is, and he will be again on this world.
Some people see, but they still say "I don't believe it."
Should we take their words as truth..when asked or the accounting of what they do not believe in, is brought to bare witness on the truth?
It is human nature to be naive and ignorant to the truth!...because most do not believe in the truth.
And others are hidding the truth, and opressing it,...so how can one know the truth if it is being hidden, subdued or oppressed?
You have to take someones word for it...sooner or later....a truth must be valid to make all things be known in reality!
Might aswell Take the word of the ones who were there at the time of the accounting.....makes perfect sense to me.
But then again not all people think like me....But the police do...they want people who have seen or witnessed things first hand...as witnesses, and believe in what they saw or say they saw.
Be it enough to formulate some form of accounting of what occured at a specific time line...to solve the case....but if we did not have witnesses to the act or actions done...would that mean it did not occur?....no it would simply state that there were no witnesses to the act or actions...but in time..as the crow flies....the act or actions will create a ripple in time..and events will occur...because of that act or action done....and they have been foretold what they will be...and they are happening right now!!...I am a witness to them!
So I can say this man named Jeshua or Jesus did live and was crusified....the problem I have is with the reason they claim he died for...which is said he died for our sins...
I believe He died because of our sins......"Do no more sin and be forgiven"...he said once!...was it enough?...and they killed him...so he died because of our sins...not for them...and we are to be punished for our crimes....more woe, more wrath, more ryders of the four horsemen...over the earth....So this visionary image does not speak about forgiveness of sins, and dying for our sins...etc....it shows us we are to be punished for them all!...and so all sins must come into being...so they can be judged by the higher powers that be...and Jesus or Jeshua are speaking from that place about it coming soon if not already!
Naive...would be to repute that valid evidence, by way of ignorance of the valid truth being told, shown, and reshown....be it old or new...for the truth does not change!
So who is being Naive here?...certainly not those who believe in the accounting by credible witnesses...who actually were there, and had it written down, so others could know about it in future less we not forget about it!...as seems to be the case nowadays.
The basis of Christianity is Jesus' redemptive work on the cross. That's why the cross is our symbol. Virtually all Christians believe this.
The denominations occur because of differences of opinion in doctrine (baptism, is salvation permanent, will all or only some be saved, election, etc.). Other, more minor differences are: style of worship, style of music, selection of deacons/elders, etc.
I don't care if you think the differences are minor. The point is still how do people with the same divine spirit not receive the same message.
If god is there, and divine like you say he is, then there should be no problems getting his complete message across.
Your god says he wants unified doctrine. Your god says he wants all to be saved, yet he will allow confusion to run amok in his churches and around his followers.
"A god who is all-knowing and all-powerful and who does not even make sure his creatures understand his intention-could that be a god of goodness? Who allows countless doubts and dubieties to persist, for thousands of years, as though the salvation of mankind were unaffected by them, and who on the other hand holds out the prospect of frightful consequences if any mistake is made as to the nature of truth?...Did he perhaps lack intelligence to do so? Or the eloquence? Must he not then...be able to help and counsel [his creatures], except in the manner of a deaf man making all kinds of ambiguous signs when the most fearful danger is about to befall on his child or dog?"--- Friedrich Nietzsche
This being said...who should we take the words of?...someone who was not living at the time of the events, or other than the one putting his hands into the wounds of the one no one believes in?...that would be naive...I'd say.
For if one (living now)does not believe in what was before him...then his words will not speak of the truth that did occur...be it in front of his eyes, or not....and what comes after him...is foretold...and is revealing itself right now...before his return....so if we see the signs of his coming, then we know he was, he is, and he will be again on this world.
Some people see, but they still say "I don't believe it."
Should we take their words as truth..when asked or the accounting of what they do not believe in, is brought to bare witness on the truth?
It is human nature to be naive and ignorant to the truth!...because most do not believe in the truth.
And others are hiding the truth, and opressing it,...so how can one know the truth if it is being hidden, subdued or oppressed?
You have to take someones word for it...sooner or later.
Might aswell Take the word of the ones who were there at the time of the accounting.....makes perfect sense to me.
But then again not all people think like me....But the police do...they want people who have seen or witnessed things first hand...as witnesses, and believe in what they saw or say they saw.
Be it enough to formulate some form of accounting of what occured at a specific time line...to solve the case.
Naive...would be to repute that valid evidence, by way of ignorance of the valid truth being told....be it old or new...
So who is being Naive here?...certainly not those who believe in the accounting by credible witnesses...who actually were there, and had it written down, so others could know about it in future less we not forget about it!...as seems to be the case nowadays.
THEY WERE NOT THERE....how many times must this be repeated? The gospel accounts were not written by people who were there. Paul wasn't even there. Do your research.
I have to disagree on that one. Rev doesn't tell anyone else how they should think, and is only speaking in regard to personal belief, not anyone else's discrete experiences.
Yeah she explained it to me. I didn't know what she believed and after she told me, I said no problem
THEY WERE NOT THERE....how many times must this be repeated? The gospel accounts were not written by people who were there. Paul wasn't even there. Do your research.
The Apostle John was there. In addition, we're not entirely sure that Matthew wasn't the writer of the book bearing his name.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
