Are you an atheist?

[Bladerunner]

Blade,

It is of no concern to me that Obama is any particular religion. He doesn't push that religion (whatever it is) down our throats in the name of religion, unlike some people here. He does what he does because that is his political stance.

I see Mr. Obama as a product of his times. Pulling out of the Middle East wars is an extension of what this country has wanted to do for a long time. The Viet Nam conflict and now the Middle East conflict are issues for which there is limited support at best. Continual involvement in war is not popular unless you make ammunition for a living. Which means that at least some of the push is for the benefit of the so-called military-industrial complex, not necessarily for the benefit of the USA as a whole.

We are not the world's traffic cop and should not be. Therefore, if Mr. Obama chooses to not support the wars overseas, he is merely reflecting the political stance of lots of his constituents. I can't truthfully say that in the changing political climate of the world he is wrong to try to disengage from wars that are unwinnable. Essentially the wars are unwinnable because they are more on the order of civil wars (between Wahabbi, Sunni, and Shiite sectarian groups) where we would have to violate our own concept of freedom of religion to pick a side. If we pick one sect, we have in essence made a decision between different religions. It would be the same as if we chose (let me be arbitrary here) that Methodism was the "right" religion and all others were wrong. Do you see the analogy? Do you recognize that the conflicts really would force us to violate our own concept of freedom of religion?

What happens when the war is over is that life can quiet down and people can stop to think about how to improve their lot in life. And if it happens that the nation that just ended a conflict starts yet another internal conflict because the previous winners cannot hold on to their winnings... is that really our problem? This country went through a lot of similar historical turbulence including the time after the end of the Revolutionary war and the beginning of the United States government as a new nation on Earth. We've had our civil wars (including THE Civil War) and our internal clashes - such as the Civil Rights unrest that started in the 1960s but there were others throughout our history if you bothered to look. Why should we forget our history and make decisions for other countries? Let THEM sort our THEIR issues first. Then, if we don't like what they do, we just don't trade with them.

Along the lines of how religions guide our personal interactions with others: It is not my concern that a man beats his wife for any particular religious purpose. If he does that, he is an idiot regardless of his religion. It is possible that he does what he does out of having been religiously indoctrinated. In that case, I blame religion - but the problem is still that the person who physically abuses another person is still a thug, idiot, or worse.

Oh, one last little thing: Blade, my comments about fear stemmed from the article (that you had trouble opening online) in which the author tried to say that "phobeo" doesn't always mean "fear" in the Greek texts, in the context of "fearing God." In my opinion, he was being an apologist.

Of COURSE you have to fear God if you are going to be a "good little worshiper" - because the God in question is arrogant, narcissistic, authoritarian, mercurial, and vengeful. Just like the leader of many street gangs today, you do as he says because you fear he will squash you out of existence if you don't. My point was that the author of the article was trying to say that "fear" (in Greek) didn't mean what it meant when used in the Bible, even though the Bible was translated from the Greek texts in question. This is a typical example of Biblical apologist double-speak. Thanks, but no thanks. A literal translation is all I need. I don't need some jerk-wad telling me what words mean when their meanings are well-known already.

Doc....it seems that you and I agree on somethings and other things we can agree to disagree.

It is clear that you like Libre have made you choice. Like Libre, I feel this is unfortunate.

I don't ever think I was called a jerk-wad before,,,,,must be something new but I know by the way you used it, its meaning is Bad........Good and Bad.....always Good and Bad

Have a nice day Doc

Blade

 

[dan-cat]

In fact, I don't even pity you because you have made a knowable decision and will be held responsible for it.

This is why I reject your point of view out of hand.

If you were able to view the results of Libre's decision, right here and now, on earth, you WOULD feel pity for him or have severe emotional issues.

It is only because your belief pushes the results of Libre's decision beyond your scope of experience that it remains remotely palatable for you.

This is the way it must be to retain such a belief. You must disconnect yourself emotionally from the plight of others. To not feel pity. Transferring the consequences of disbelief to the realm that you cannot experience allows you to do this.

You talk about the consequences of disbelief but you don't feel them.
That is the terrible consequence of your belief. You cannot help those who are in the worst strife of all and the only comfort you can glean is that it was their decision. To me that is no comfort at all.

 

[Bladerunner]

It is clear that some on this thread feel that what I am writing about is wrong (for several reasons).

I have tried to answer your questions as truthfully as I can. I have tried to get you to see that GOD is the real thing and what SIMPLE step (1) you have to take to ensure a life of immortality. I don't gain anything by doing this, yet I feel that there is a blinding wall over some of those eyes that post in this forum. This is what I wanted to remove at least for some.

However, I also feel and see that any further (as some put it 'Preaching') attempts at educating you to the fact that the Bible is a specifically designed Book will be futile unless there is a wanting of that information by some of those on this thread.

Therefore, from this day forward, if someone has a question(s) out there, I will try and answer it.

If someone directs a post at me, I will also answer it.

If someone states a falsehood about God or the Bible, I will correct it with references.

If you want to attack me in a post, without any statement or question, I will not reply.

If no one does one of the above, then I will not be back on this thread. simple as that.

I will not promise that I can keep to the above statements because in the past my promises have rather worthless..lol..... I will, however, try very hard,

Rem,this,,,,,you sins have already been paid for in BLOOD. All you have to do is recognize that and ask for help from Jesus. It is that SIMPLE!

I hope everyone has a huge number of great days ahead and may God Bless every one of you!

Bladerunner

 

[dan-cat]

This is what I wanted to remove at least for some.

Why some? This comes across as very sinister. Perhaps unintentional.

However, I also feel and see that any further (as some put it 'Preaching') attempts at educating you to the fact that the Bible is a specifically designed Book will be futile unless there is a wanting of that information by some of those on this thread.

Absolutely. I don't want to feel pitiless.

Therefore, from this day forward, if someone has a question(s) out there, I will try and answer it.

If someone directs a post at me, I will also answer it. ...

All very grandiose but what you are doing is nothing special.
You hold a religious belief ... nothing special.
You are discussing that belief on the internet ... nothing special

If you really want to know why your approach is a turn off ... at least for me... I can describe with two points.

1) Lack of humility
2) Lack of pity

 

[Frothingslosh]

Blade, the only people posting falsehoods in this thread (since I've joined it) about God and the Bible have been you and Al-Aziz.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Hi AccessBlaster....it has been a while ........good to talk to you again.


********************
You question about the gospel is a good one and the answer is NO.

According to some dictionary, Gospel means the teachings of Jesus Christ. I do not teach that. What I do try to teach is the fact that the Holy Bible is a specifically designed book by a supernatural person,, God, who is outside of our time continuum. He not only created the earth and the heavens but he also knew what was going to happen before it happened. Our scientist are just now finding that out. With aid of Computers, we can not only search the Bible for similarities, but we can check out the meanings of phrases and words, in all three of the translations (Hebrew, Greek and Latin) and even the original codex (scrolls) held by the Catholic Church.

I think the core message of the Gospel is "Good News" as illustrated here.

The Basic Meaning of the Term

The term gospel is found ninety-nine times in the NASB and ninety-two times in the NET Bible. In the Greek New Testament, gospel is the translation of the Greek noun euangelion (occurring 76 times) “good news,” and the verb euangelizo (occurring 54 times), meaning “to bring or announce good news.” Both words are derived from the noun angelos, “messenger.” In classical Greek, an euangelos was one who brought a message of victory or other political or personal news that caused joy. In addition, euangelizomai (the middle voice form of the verb) meant “to speak as a messenger of gladness, to proclaim good news.”1 Further, the noun euangelion became a technical term for the message of victory, though it was also used for a political or private message that brought joy.2

My point is by focusing on Obama and other religions might be legit in other posts, here it only servers to harden the opposition.
You are part of a faith based religion that struggles to prove your points with rhetoric. Faith, good works and leading by example is all the proof you need.

 

[Libre]

************

About the 'magic coin', you will have to ask that again,,,,,,I missed that one. Sorry,,,my secretary's eyes are failing.

Have a great and productive day

Blade

Blade-
I'm not sure how to link you, but check out my post #5328

 

[Frothingslosh]

You know, I was having a discussion similar to this topic with a friend Tuesday night, and we both had to agree:

If you just look at the teachings attributed to Jesus, it really boils down the Wil Wheaton Principle ("Don't be a dick.").

And in the interest of full disclosure, my friend is not only a full-on atheist, but is loudly and evangelically convinced that Christianity is, as he puts it, "a religion of evil".

 

[Libre]

Another thing, Blade-
If Satan made Eve eat the apple (from the tree of knowledge, giving human beings the ability to think, to reason, to question the existence of spiritual beings, essentially - and if not, what is the fruit from the TOK good for anyway) - so if she had never eaten that fruit, and Adam had never eaten that fruit, and we were in paradise, would we know or care that we were in paradise?
You think the evolution of species is all a fabrication or a gross mis-understanding of the origins and development of life on Earth?
You can write off all the contradictions and just plain old terrible advice in the Bible?
You think that the only true forces are GOOD and EVIL, the former backed by the Man above and the latter by the "fallen angel" below? So wars and baseball games are really being fought - and played - in proxy for these two deities?
If you believe all this, then I can say that you TOO have chosen. You've chosen the path of ignorance and it's there you seem doomed to stay.
Whatever will you say to the Gatekeeper (if he indeed exists) when he lets me in as a freethinker, but you are condemned for believing claptrap with no evidence.

 

[Rabbie]

Another Rabbi in Spain around 1200 AD, spoke about the 400 years the promised land would be held by the Ottoman empire (1500 - 1900).


Blade

Just a small quibble with you here. The Ottoman Empiren/turkey controlled what is now called Israel till 1916 not 1900. After that it was under the control the British until 1948.

You really need to make sure your facts are correct because just one error weakens all your arguments.

 

[Bladerunner]

I think the core message of the Gospel is "Good News" as illustrated here..

AccessBlaster,

I guess I read it wrong,,,,as I have Doc and his Fear of God statement.

The gospels, (the story of Jesus Christ) I do not tell. I leave that to someone else far better than me. I have kept my head buried in the prophecies. It is amazing.

However, I have never lied to you or the others. God is real, the Bible is real and the FREE choice is real. All you have to do is ask!

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

Just a small quibble with you here. The Ottoman Empiren/turkey controlled what is now called Israel till 1916 not 1900. After that it was under the control the British until 1948.

You really need to make sure your facts are correct because just one error weakens all your arguments.

Thank you Rabbi,,, I left out the (s) 1500(s) to 1900(s). Notice the 1200 date should have been 1200(s) as well. I was just telling the story not trying to be exact. However, thank you for at least checking it out.

Yes, The Balfour Declaration of November 1917, gave the land back to Israel, yes with British oversee (see below). The Mamluks, who had been reigning in Jerusalem since 1250, were conquered in 1517 by the Ottoman Turks.

Yes, exactly 400 years ----yes they were right. from the 1500s to the 1900s.
You know for a prophecy a few years would have been ok, but this was on the money. This ended the Jewish Diaspora that had lasted a little over 2000 years. (this is not exact)

In 1948, Israel became a nation (in one day) less than 24 hours later they were attached by Islamic Muslims, I think about 7 countries at one time.


Here is the URL if you want exactly.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/12th-century-rabbi-predicted-israels-future/

Nonetheless, the influence of the Balfour Declaration on the course of post-war events was immediate: According to the “mandate” system created by the Versailles Treaty of 1919, Britain was entrusted with the temporary administration of Palestine, with the understanding that it would work on behalf of both its Jewish and Arab inhabitants. Many Arabs, in Palestine and elsewhere, were angered by their failure to receive the nationhood and self-government they had been led to expect in return for their participation in the war against Turkey. In the years after the war, the Jewish population in Palestine increased dramatically, along with the instances of Jewish-Arab violence. The area’s instability led Britain to delay making a decision on Palestine’s future. In the aftermath of World War II and the terrors of the Holocaust, however, growing international support for Zionism led to the official declaration in 1948 of the State of Israel.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/the-balfour-declaration

Have a nice day

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

Another thing, Blade-
If Satan made Eve eat the apple (from the tree of knowledge, giving human beings the ability to think, to reason, to question the existence of spiritual beings, essentially - and if not, what is the fruit from the TOK good for anyway) - so if she had never eaten that fruit, and Adam had never eaten that fruit, and we were in paradise, would we know or care that we were in paradise?
You think the evolution of species is all a fabrication or a gross mis-understanding of the origins and development of life on Earth?
You can write off all the contradictions and just plain old terrible advice in the Bible?
You think that the only true forces are GOOD and EVIL, the former backed by the Man above and the latter by the "fallen angel" below? So wars and baseball games are really being fought - and played - in proxy for these two deities?
If you believe all this, then I can say that you TOO have chosen. You've chosen the path of ignorance and it's there you seem doomed to stay.
Whatever will you say to the Gatekeeper (if he indeed exists) when he lets me in as a freethinker, but you are condemned for believing claptrap with no evidence.

Libre:
Satan convinced Eve to eat the apple,,,,It was a choice? So was Adams Choice although his choice was made because of Love.

There is a hiccup in this part of the scripture. It is evident by the scriptures in Gen 3:6, that EVE was experiencing lust and want of the tree. Until then they had been in the garden for some time and had not even thought about the tree. the phrase (that it was pleasant to the eyes,) comes up again in Revelations.

Personally , I think that Satan not only told her the apple was good for her but used his powers to get her to lust for that apple.

The moral of the story, if he can do that to her, he certainly do it to us.

************
Evolution of the species is antithetical to the word of God. Rem, all the animals on land (ALL of them) was made on the sixth day with Man being last on that list. Yes, there are mutations, and changes in a species on a small scale, but nothing that would suggest that man came from a monkey or birds came from Dinosaurs. Except there were some birds that were dinosaurs .....several of them from what I rem.
***********
contradictions and terrible advice in the Bible........Care to expand on that?

Oh, come on Libre,,,, you running around in left field here. you compare a war to a ball game. You know what is good and evil.!

We are all free thinkers..... Free to do what we want, free to make decisions of all kinds..That free thinking makes us who we are.......I know what you are trying to say but that ole dog won't hunt.

Have a good day

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

You are part of a faith based religion that struggles to prove your points with rhetoric. Faith, good works and leading by example is all the proof you need.

Rhetoric????? Why do we try and get you to save your soul. Ask yourself--WHY? What do we get out of it????? NOTHING

I personally could be your friend regardless of your religious persuasion. Yet, for, I guess the humanity of it, I try to get you to choose to live forever?

My Bad

Have a good day my friend

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

Hey Blade-
You could give me a magic coin and tell me, if I make a wish with the magic coin in my hand, the wish will come true - and the only requirement is that I truly believe deep in my heart that the coin is really magic. I can't just SAY that it's magic, I have to actually BELIEVE that it is..

Are you going to give me a specific designer book that will prove to me that that coin is magic.

In that case, Yes. but only YES after I take the time to prove to myself that the book he gave me was for real and could indeed prove the coin was real.

Hey Blade- And then if you wished on the coin and the wish didn't come true, you're told either:
1- it WILL come true someday
2- it didn't come true because you didn't REALLY believe the coin was magic
or some combination of 1 and 2. You might be told you only have to wish HARDER or believe in the coin even MORE.

I will assume that is is in reference to a prayer that was not answered? What can I say?????????

I know of prayers that have been answered. my Mother prayed every night that I was out when I was a teenager. Around here, getting hurt or killed is very easy especially for teenagers. I am still alive so I guess her prayers were answered and there have been times when I knew for a fact, I had a angel in my pocket. All of you, I am sure have had those times.

I know of a fact, having worked in the medical field for many years, that prayers really are answered. In most cases, it was simply a miracle, In other, instances, the answer was more subtle.

Right now, within the Muslim country of IRAN, Christianity is growing by a whopping 17%. There are many stories coming out of there that many miracles have been happening.

Sometimes the answered prayer comes in an unexpected form or as I said in another post, sometimes the absence of an answer is the answer unto itself.

Have a good day my friend

Blade

 

[Frothingslosh]

Hey, look: an early working draft of the KJV has been found. Funny, it sure sounds like the KJV didn't just get magically delivered to the printers by HeavenlyExpress. In fact, it appears that it went through the same editing process every translation went through.

 

[Libre]

Libre:
***********
contradictions and terrible advice in the Bible........Care to expand on that?
Blade

Just dealing with contradictions, here. And far too many to post. It would greatly exceed the 25,000 character limit of posts on this forum.

The terrible advice on some other day.

Excerpted from:
http://www.amazon.com/Lucifers-Handbook-Simplified-Critique-Religion-ebook/dp/B003DKJBWM


Mt 2:13 Wise men follow star and report to Herod. Herod has all children slaughtered, and
Joseph and family flee to Egypt, where Jesus grows up. Contra Mk, Lk, & Jn, in which none of
this happened. Lk 2:39 says Jesus grew up in Nazareth.

Lk 2:1-7 Joseph comes to Bethlehem to pay taxes; stays in manger; Jesus born there;
shepherds hear angels and come visit. Contra Mt, Mk, & Jn, in which none of this happened.
In Lk, there is no star, no wise men, and no slaughter and flight, as in Mt.

In fact, Mk and Jn apparently thought there was nothing at all unusual about Jesus' birth. It is
not even mentioned.

Jn 2:1-11 says that when Jesus turned water to wine at age thirty-three, that was first sign of
messiahship, thus denying anything unusual about birth or baptism (in which God supposedly
spoke from Heaven.) Jn 7:40 says Jesus not born in Bethlehem, as the Scriptures had
predicted The Christ would be, (and which was later supplied by Matthew and Luke).

Acts 13:22 Messiah was prophesied to be descendant of David; there was no mention of
virgins. And in Rom 1:1 Paul denies Virgin Birth; he says Jesus is a descendant of David
according to the flesh. And in Rev 22:16 Jesus says he is descendant of David. Throughout, He
admits He is the son of Joseph according to the flesh, the son of God only "spiritually;" He
never mentions a Virgin Birth. (Note: Virgin Birth an obvious Pagan influence, in which
everybody who was anybody was the son of a virgin and a god. Discussed at greater length
later.)

Mt 10:1 & Mk 3:13 Jesus appoints twelve disciples, including one Thaddaeus, and one Judas.
Contra Lk 6:13, Jn 14:22 & Acts 1:12, in which the twelve include two Judases: Judas
Iscariot, and Judas, the brother of James, but no one called Thaddaeus. (Note: Pagan sun-gods
often had twelve "satellites," since the solar year is divided into twelve lunar months.)

Lk 22:45 Disciples go to sleep in garden and are awakened by Jesus only once. Contra Mt
26:36, & Mk 14:32 in which it happens a nice even three times. (Note: Ancient mysticism
regarded the number three as the most magical of all numbers. See "trinities" later in discussion.

Sevens, tens, and forties were rather potent also; but in all mythology, things are made to
happen in threes if at all possible. (In tracing the origins of the Bible through language analysis,
researchers found that originally it said baptism should be done in the name of the Father and
Son only; but several hundred years later, some scribe could no longer stand copying such an
awkward number, so he rounded it out to the more significant, and aesthetically satisfying, three
by adding a separate "Holy Ghost.")

Mt 26:49, & Mk 14:43 Judas betrays Jesus with a kiss. Contra Jn 18:4 in which he does not;
Jesus voluntarily turns Himself over to the soldiers as soon as He sees them. (Note: A bit
strange that, if Jesus had been speaking to multitudes, it would be necessary for a disciple to
point Him out.)

Lk 22:50 Ear of guard is cut off, and Jesus puts it back on. Contra Mt, Mk, & Lk, in which He
just lets it lie on the ground.

Lk 23:6 Pilate sends Jesus to Herod; Herod sends Him back. Contra other three Gospels, in
which he does no such thing.

Mt 27:24 Pilate washes hands. In other Gospels he does not.

Jn 19:17 Jesus carries His own cross. Contra Mt, Mk, & Lk, in which man called Simon of
Cyrene carries it for Him.

on
and
on
.
.
.


Here's the book (or part of it):
http://www.miltontimmons.com/LuciferPt1.html

 

[Bladerunner]

Hey, look: an early working draft of the KJV has been found. Funny, it sure sounds like the KJV didn't just get magically delivered to the printers by HeavenlyExpress. In fact, it appears that it went through the same editing process every translation went through.

Hey Frothy: Yes, the KJV was written in the early to late 1600. King James VI or possible James I saw to that.

I use it exclusively mainly because it is closer to the Septuagint, Latin, Hebrew and Codex (scrolls) than any other. A lot of the newer bibles have tried to make it more PC or user friendly but that takes away what it was designed for.

Yes, the KJV has its problems, Rapture-Harpozo --caught -up and of course the 'Church' should have been Ecclesia. Man has misused this for years. But I guess if it had been Ecclesia, we would now have (for example only) the Roman Catholic Ecclesia. Man screws everything up at one time or the other. It is because of that free will we have.

have a nice day

Blade

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Blade, I have tried to be fair and even, and it appears that one of my posts could have been incorrectly interpreted as calling you a "jerk-wad." My intent was that the apologist who wrote an article on the meaning of Greek "phob" as a root word was the jerk-wad. He was trying to argue that black was white, that red was green, and that fear was reverence. In other words, he was trying to use "convenient" definitions. He was trying to say that fear was not fear. Shades of Orwellian double-speak!

If you took offence to that post, I apologize for being a bit imprecise as to whom I was calling a jerk-wad. You were not the intended target of that epithet.

Now, as to the link from Frothingslosh - I saw that article and it was made clear that the KJV was a directed translation. (I.e. where there was an optional meaning, King James directed the scribes as to the sense of the translation they would use.) James, you see, was a noted misogynist and wanted to cement his power by making a translation to counter the alternative interpretations of the Bible in use at that time. So whenever there was a choice, the scribes were told to downplay women and increase the strength of the words favoring an authoritarian (and rather harsh) God. The former was one of James's personal prejudices. The latter was a nod to the church in opposition to the various denominations in which a schism had already occurred.

It is for this reason that I long ago realized I could not trust ANY PART of the KJV - because I had no easy way to know which parts of the translation were influenced by the biases imposed by King James. I could guess - but I could not be sure. And you know, of course, that the scribes followed the Golden Rule as King James knew it: "They that have the gold make the rules."

Having said that, I must express sadness that you choose to follow a book known to be a biased translation. It means that YOU have been "poisoned" (in your attitudes) by the venom that went into the translation. I don't believe in God because none of the modern translations contain anything that changes my mind on the subject, but I can see the headaches that KJV brings about in everyday life, and that encompasses so many of the modern religions that it makes me almost sick to think of it. It also makes me sad to hear folks say that the Bible was "inspired by God" when in fact the KJV was inspired by a woman-hater and political wheeler-dealer.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Blade, I'm curious to know how you can stand there with a straight face and call the Bible the inerrant word of God in one post while in another stating that you know your preferred version (which you've already said is 100% accurate and divinely inspired) has...issues.