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.
having rights to the holy spirit is like having rights to sunshine. Run naked on an africian plain, she what the holy spirit is capable of. It "loves", thats true enough. it is humans that say the evil lion ate the poor little believing guy.
There's a problem with your reasoning. Even all these years later I could seek forgiveness from Christ if I just had sufficient historical proof he even existed. So I definitely have not committed blasphemy, nor would I likely ever. I'm always ready willing and able to believe.
But as not a single secular historian within 90 years of his birth mentions him even once I find it terribly hard that a man who caused the earth to turn dark for 3 hours and caused earthquakes to shake the land and caused thousands of dead bodies to come out of their graves and go into Jerusalem and appear to many of the people---well, how is it not a single historian mentions this??
Yet come Easter Sunday it's back to business as usual and everybody seems to have forgotten the Night of the Living Dead phenomenon.
So apart from the epistles and gospels, which are purely church biased writings written half a century to nearly a century after Jesus ascended, what proof can Christians show me that would convince me Jesus was divine?
Show me that and I'd happily come back to believing he was divine. If you can't show me then just fall back on those tried and true typical non-responses, "You'll never believe because your heart is hardened" stuff.
This is a very different issue from what you raised in OP....a lack of convincing proof of events described in the New Testament is a separate matter from issues of salvation or condemnation. You are moving the goalposts all over the place here.
And by the way, I'm actually an atheist - but felt the need to point out that it seems more like you're going on a ranting spree here than asking a genuine question. That's ok - but be careful about attacking a faith in its own forum, as that is discouraged.
The point being I don't go for doublespeak and triplespeak and quadruplespeak like what's found in the Bible. The Bible should mean what it says and say what it means. There should be no hidden meanings and cryptic crap and other shenanigans. It either states what it wants us to understand in plain English or it's worthless. To me, anyway.
I couldn't give you a reputation for this so I will give it to you in text. Bravo!!!
No offense taken.
More power to them, I guess. But, there is nothing about what they say that compels me to desire what they think they have. They complicate beyond recognition what, to me, is the simplest thing there could be: love.
And when a person says that they desire to honor love above all else, the Complicators mock and belittle and try to make that person feel worthless and foolish for it. Or worse, they say that a such a person is just desiring to live in sin, or is satan's spawn, and that that person is God's enemy and deserving of eternal punishment. And then they claim that they and other Complicators like themselves have exclusive right to "the Holy Spirit", that they are God's chosen, or that they alone understand the "deep things of God". But I read their posts and I KNOW that whatever it is that they think they have, is not worth having.
In Luke 12 :10 means it can be forgiven him for speaking against the son of man , but if the man continues to speak against the son of man unrepentant and passes from this life the offence will not be forgiven him.
This is a very different issue from what you raised in OP....a lack of convincing proof of events described in the New Testament is a separate matter from issues of salvation or condemnation. You are moving the goalposts all over the place here.
And by the way, I'm actually an atheist - but felt the need to point out that it seems more like you're going on a ranting spree here than asking a genuine question. That's ok - but be careful about attacking a faith in its own forum, as that is discouraged.
Well, if you've spent any time here you know that it's impossible to stay on point by comment #35 or so. And I'm just responding to a person's question, in this case Rob, so if I'm off point and answering his question then his question is off point. That's just the way it happens in any extended discussion.
In Luke 12 :10 means it can be forgiven him for speaking against the son of man , but if the man continues to speak against the son of man unrepentant and passes from this life the offence will not be forgiven him.
So why didn't Jesus just state it that way? Then we'd know exactly what he wanted us to understand. I never read it that way.
Many atheists will tell you that the reason they became atheist was because they read the Bible. Now think about that: the Bible can actually create atheists simply by them reading it. Why do you think that is?
Well at least you held out till post #3 to expose your real intentions. You were not sincerely asking a question because your reply to my answer was waaayyy off your own topic already and that answer I gave was respectively post no#2 and your response was #no.3. Boy that topic derailed fast..
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.
