The Ebolaworld Happy Fun Blog Comment Post Page
y on a freeway???
KER-SPLAT!
YEAH!
I WANNA PRAY EVERYWHERE!
BYZAK!
i have an idea! lets pray in the streets of fullujah! i'm sure we won't be stoned/castrated/set on fire/shot!
How dare these liberals try to take away my right to force kids in public schools to pray!
http://www.christian-underground...ex.php?
aid_=749
Haha, check that out.
I don't see a problem with it. During the monment of silence in school, I don't even pray. That is what church, mosces, and segregations are for, not to mention before dinner. This is just another issue with the right of religion and others should respect that.
"Prayer in prison may make you a target for rape. Just saying."
LOL!!!!!!
did you actually pay to do that?
Yes, but Scuba Steve why must there be a moment of silence? Christians can pray (talk to themselves) at any time of the day in school.
Just let people do what they want to do! 
So I think I'll pray now!
because God can't hear you if you pray privately or think your prayer, he doesn't have good ears.
I mean, all those poor christians, being so persecuted, they just have congress, the white house, the supreme court, the bible belt, and a majority of americans to help them. WHY WONT YOU LET THOSE CHRISTIANS LIVE?
What about the Jews, huh kid? Nobody gives a damn about them. Ooh, you're persecuted... fuck you, I'm Christian as well, I have no idea where the hell this persecution shit is coming from.
The martyr syndrome, as I call it, is a central point of Christianity for obvious reasons. Christians, who want to imitiate their beloved hero, either are too wimpy to give their lives or don't have the opportunity to do so (but then again, with cheap flights to Tehran or Baghdad, I'm gonna say wimpy). So they do the next best thing by pretending to be persecuted to get that "rush" of being like Jesus even if it makes them look paranoid to scream persecution in a country that is 85% Christian.
sigh, its in the freaking constitution, anyone can pray whenever the hell they want, but a government institution can not make prayer mandotory, WHY IS THIS EVEN A ISSUE!?
'Cause they iz gay!
I mean,
Cuz they iz gay!
If Christians know that gay marriage is unconstitutional, why don't they know that forcing kids to pray in school is also unconstitutional? Can anyone answer that?
Im a Christian and I respect other people's religons and views. I feel that the ACLU removing mandatory prayer is fine, simply because with so many religons out theire, we would have to pray to 300 different gods before we finaly got to work. I feel that people are entitled to their own ideas, and i am not one of those people who run around preaching hellfire and death to those who don't believe in Christ or God. There are some people who do, and those who don't. I personally feel that instead of forcing others to belive what I do, my time is better spent doing what I have to do to serve my country to the best of my ability. However, some of the stuff the ACLU does is rediculous and frivolous, so I dislike them not for what they set out to do, but how they do it. I'm not saying that Christains are any better, because it appears that most of them who talk here have never heard of spell check, or words other than those you can't say on TV.
Finally, someone who thinks like me.
300? Try 350 million. And that's only in one reliegon.
Ah.
The Regardless Christians have come at last!
Christians shouldn't need or want prayer in schools. I'm really tired of these Christians making fools of themselves. They can pray to themselves they don't need the government to make them.
When praying becomes more important than homeless people dying in the streets or poor families having nothing to eat in the world's biggest economy or any other social catastrophe, something's not right...
Value centered bastards. That's what christianity is all about. Me, myself, and I in front of a Bible shaped dildo. Afterwards, maybe, just maybe, I'll do something about IMPORTANT social issues.
I don't seem to get this action.
Why would they say this kind of stuff?
Who cares anyway? I don't care if a Christian prays.
Persecute me? Oh, please.
Next time if I persecute you I'll keep in mind that there are one billion Christians on the globe.
These kind of propaganda is just silly. Here, in Belgium, we have a lot of Christians, almost everybody is. However, we don't pray (a lot) nor believe God is a man sitting on his throne in a magical place called heaven. Well, of course, there might be a minority who does (talking about Belgium here, just a reminder). Most of us believe in God as a spirit, energy which flows on the earth. God as in the good in everything.
Love, peace, harmony.
The ACLU does not want any Christianity what so ever. The ACLU is run only by godless liberals who want power and will do anything to get power.
Why do liberals love such things like Pocahontas or "wishes" and bullshit like that...Because the liberals say that we should worship the fucking environment. Liberals also do not believe in black or white, only shades of grey.
What the fuck is everyone on this site trying to do convert us into Buddhism, Voo-Doo, Mormons, Scientologists, or (God-forbid) SATANISTS!!!!!?????
Kudos to SpaceDynamicsCo for looking at both sides.
bush20041- Couldn't find support for your statements. Here's some good reading:
ACLU quote:
“The ACLU would be the first...to defend Rev. Turner’s right to espouse his Christian beliefs”
http://www.aclu.org/religion/gov...051114.html?
ht=
Texas Nat'l Repub. Party quote:
"The Republican Party of Texas affirms that the [USA] is a Christian nation...."
http://www.texasgop.org/site/Doc...4.pdf?
docID=121
Bush20041, you fucktard, we're trying to go up against Christians who attempt to pray at every possibility in life.
The ALCU, I mean - not us in particular.
SpaceDynamicsCo, cool name. As for the subject at hand the guy with the cool name is right. ACLU in no way speaks for every Christian on the planet.
As for Bush20041, that's a little extreme. However, in almost every lie there is a little truth. The ACLU is corrupt, and some liberals (in no way all) do believe some unusual things, but Bush20041 Christians should not and can not enforce Christianity on others. It is their responsibility to believe not yours to make them believe.
As a Christian I believe there is only one way to Heaven. If you do not except Christ into your life then your not going there. However, prayer in schools is not going to get any extra people to believe in Christ and I REALLY don't want to have to pray to other gods I REALLY don't believe in.
As for the holidays, as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't really matter what the stores do with it or what anyone else does with it. We will still celebrate Christmas. We don't believe in any of the other things why celebrate them? Christmas has been completely commercialized but that doesn't mean that we don't celebrate it. Christmas (for my family of Christians) is a time to celebrate our Saviours birth. The presents, the tree, and everything else is just our way of celebrating it. So, unless you guys start trying to make Christmas illegal, I really have no issue.
Wait, this is the wrong blog for the Christmas thing. You can just ignore that part.
Oh, by the way, the thing on the Texas government was awesome.
"What the fuck is everyone on this site trying to do convert us into Buddhism, Voo-Doo, Mormons, Scientologists, or (God-forbid) SATANISTS!!!!!?????"
How auful! A Buddhist! Those Godless bastards! And the mormons. God save our souls! God forbid we become Jewish, Muslim, or Hindu. No, I'll stay with God and discriminate against people with sensible beliefs.
HOLY MOTHER OF GOD!
YOU GUYS HAVE TURNED ME INTO A MORMON!
Bush20041, your conversion comment sounds a little like Pat Robertson's feminist comment. Is this a coincidence?
Interesting how Bush20041 first called all liberals "godless" and then insisted that they are trying to convert people into satanists, buddhists, scientologists (which isn't a religion to begin with), mormons, and voodoo practicioners. Perhaps they're like so many others in that they believe that no one can be truely godless. At least those religions and psudo-religions aren't going on huge conversion campaigns and trying to stick their religious symbols in secular institutions. When was the last time you saw an inverted pentagram in a courthouse? A Book of Mormon?
Shame on:
Agharo -- stop insulting bush20041
John Q. Smith -- what??
Captain Caveman -- you are horrible
Colin
Drew -- miserable excuse for a conservative
Larry Schober -- hate you especially
teh_guy
RhubarbRiot
Kyora
SpaceDynamicsCo
AznShortBoi
johnston49er -- immature
Andkon
brock -- your sarcasm is sick
EvilPie -- i hope you die
and lastly, SAM T -- I wouldn't be surprised if you were a reincarnation of SATAN HIMSELF
What the hell did I do?
"you fucktard, we're trying to go up against Christians" -- direct quote from larry schober
Lbert, that is a misquote the real quote is this, "Bush20041, you fucktard, we're trying to go up against Christians who attempt to pray at every possibility in life."
More or less they are making fun of ACLU and Pat Robertson. As for Christians in general, well they make fun of them too but, it's really more their problem than Christians problem if you know what I mean.
(snicker)(snicker)(face turning red can't hold it in much loooongeeeer) BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! ME! A SORRY EXCUSE FOR A CONSERVATIVE!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!!
(sigh, snicker) ok, let me get this straight. You think that I'm a poor "excuse" (like I need an excuse) for a conservative. What the crap does that mean? Does it mean I'm a lib? Because you can just look at the Taco-Man on Homestarrunner post and figure that out. Is it because I can't seem to win an argument with Bax, well, you'd be right. I don't have the "firepower" to comete with him and, he happens to have been around longer and knows how to keep up a convincing debate (which I don't). Is it because I don't like Pat Robertson or ACLU? Well guess what, that means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!! So I don't like him. In actuality, I'm pretty certain that his theology is messed up as bad as it gets and I'm pretty sure he's just a suckup to politicians and he tells people to send in their money ALL THE TIME!! (sigh) so what is the reason I'm a "poor excuse for a conservative."
"and lastly, SAM T -- I wouldn't be surprised if you were a reincarnation of SATAN HIMSELF"
A little extreme, don't you think?
Well, atleast you don't want me dead.
Lbert, you'll notice I corrected my self in the next post by saying I meant the "ACLU, not us" - it was a typo.
Also, I noticed you took my quote completely out of context:
"Bush20041, you fucktard, we're trying to go up against Christians who attempt to pray at every possibility in life."
That's what I actually said. I do not have anything against Christians, I'm one myself. What I do have a problem with is the zealots who try to force this shit onto every fucking person in this damned country, and say they're being "persecuted" by everybody - which is an impossbility, as the majority of the country is essentially Christian.
Insulting Bush20041? I merely highlighted an interesting contradiction that was made. How that is an insult is beyond me.
Ah, screw him. He'd think Limbaugh was liberal
"and lastly, SAM T -- I wouldn't be surprised if you were a reincarnation of SATAN HIMSELF"
That'd be sweet.
I am convinced that lbert doesn't exist. This is just too extreme to be real.
well, obviously he exists...he just doesn't really feel that way, and is pranking us. or he could be a total nutjob.
wow. i'm going with colin, just look at lbert's post in the christmas blog. CRAAAAZZZZYYYY!!!!
"EvilPie -- i hope you die"
what the fuck?!?!?!?!?!
up yours libert, you goat-fucking bastard!!!!!
that last one was from me.
Woot! We need more religious nutjob drama!
Hey Ibert, question for you... Were you born an idiot or did you pray for it? *laughs*
Where is your god now biatch?
And I doubt Sam T is satan himself, or else he would have some sort of amazing sexual powers.
You want his cock up your ass dont you.
i should have posted earlier, i want to be on the list of shame 
I will just ignore Larry Schober, Colin, and especially The Baxshtor, before I get pissed off.
ISLAM?
JUDAISM?
THOSE ARE FALSE???
And BLACK HEBREWS? You racist BASTARD! I'm very multicultural (got a very wierd family tree) and you have just offended me in so many ways. I'm not kidding. Though I'm probably overreacting.
I hope your just screwing with us, and don't seriously mean that stuff.
Same goes for Lbert.
I'm really sorry K. I am trying not to be racist. By the way I am hispanic.
um...when i made my first post, i had only seen your first post (the one about ten lines long)
I just now saw the rest of your bullshit list.
I'm starting to think you and Lbert are the same person.
And don't screw with Drew, he may be Republican, but he's not as ass like you.
ISLAM
JUDAISM
BLACK HEBREWS are real religions.
All the religions are real! I am just screwing around. But seriously I am really (times infinity) sorry if I offended anyone.
Please delete the list.
I am only going to make a list of retards.
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
bush20041
And don't screw with Drew, he may be Republican, but he's not as ass like you.
k | 11.28.05 - 11:47 pm | #
(laughs)(sarcastically) thanks I feel so loved.
Ok, all the religions are real. This is not news to ANYONE ON THE PLANET. What is important is which one is RIGHT. Now, I've stated which "one" I believe pretty clearly. Whatever it is that Pat Roberts professes is a cult, a mockery of Christianity and a mockery of what Christ did for us (for those of you who don't believe I don't want to hear how cheasy that might sound). Bush, you could have saved blog space and your time by saying that Christianity is the only "correct" one.
Now, all that aside, what is with you and Lbert where did you come from? Where do you live? Tell us more about you please so that we might understand you better. I'm also curious as to why you think that FDR and Woodrow Wilson are retards. Is it because they were presidents in a time where there was much war, or are you mad at them because they were slow to act (which by the way the US is being accused of being to quick to act today), or was it because FDR's economic policy nearly drove us into a deeper depression? Oh, and by the way, Satan is not retarded, he was one of the smartest and the most beautiful of all the angels, he was just very very arrogant and foolish. The rest you listed, no argument.
By the way, I don't claim to be smarter than anyone else on the website.
and at what point was he "screwing with me?"
Bush, you have managed to get alot of your stuff deleted. You are making it look like all conservatives are idiots and you are confirming their beliefs.
ISLAM?
JUDAISM?
THOSE ARE FALSE???
What the fuck? Am I missing something here? Who said anything about "Black Hebrews" anyway??
I am horrible?
Damnit, I was hoping for:
Captain Caveman - I love that Guy
Colin! for a short period of time Bush(some random number) had posted on the site that this incredibly long list of religions and said they were all "false religions."
By the way Lbert, I'm still trying to figure out how I'm a sorry excuse for a conservative.
Is there anyone lbert didn't insult?
Oh, of course. He didn't insult bush 20041.
I would just like to metion the fact that a lot of church officials have had sex with underage boys and the church is trying to persecute gays. The church is a messed up piece of crap. I personally though have nothing against your everyday catholics my mom is one of them.
Durn that librul Jew-run ACL-Jew, who's just wantin' ta remind us we ain't the only relijun in Amurka!
Despite controlling nigh-everything, the Jeebofascist persecution complex is as strong as ever...
catholic priests aren't the only one's.
this is really creapy but this guy down who lived just down the street from me was a protestant youth pastor, and he was arrested for molesting several kids.
yeesh,
(sigh), this annoys me. The fact that the media likes to jump all over this really annoys me. It is wrong and I really don't want to hear about it. In fact, the people who are at fault are the leaders of whichever church had such problematic leadership. Once again, it's called personal responsibility. Why hire somebody unless you know him well.
"Why do liberals love such things like Pocahontas or "wishes" and bullshit like that...Because the liberals say that we should worship the fucking environment."
1) God created the Earth and everything in it.
2) By worshipping the Earth, you are worshipping God.
3) If you don't care about the Earth, you don't care about God.
Are all your questions answered?
:D
*holds it* ... AHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHA!!! SCREWY LOGIC RIGHT BACK AT YOU, YA BAST*RD!
*ahem* ... sorry about that.
P.S. Pocahantas was a terrible movie.
Esn, the Bible says we are to worship God and God alone. The creations of the world are not worthy of our worship the Creator is. However, your right, we are to take care of and nurture the world.
The Bible says a lot of things.
Drew,
No, the Bible says that the Children of Israel shall have no other gods BEFORE YHVH.
And, on the contrary, many of the prophets and poets in the Bible gave praise (worship) to the creation. By addressing the wonder and glory of the universe around you, you are giving credit and praise to its creator.
The only real problem, biblically speaking, would be if you were Jewish and you worshipped nature MORE than you worshipped YHVH.
I believe the passage you're referring to is Deut. 6:13 which Jesus partially quoted during the temptation scene in Luke 4. The context nullifies your argument because the devil was tempting Jesus with power, splendor and riches (essentially tempting him to be an American)--not, I might add, tempting him with a sustainable environment.
The Bible also says that we should drag homosexual men behind our cars until they die. You gonna follow that one, too?
Drew, you've gained the terrible habit of making an idiot of yourself in public. Lighten up, guy.
best wishes,
daniel
oops - that one about the homosexuals was a misquote from somewhere else taken completely out of context.
well, at least I'm in good company.
I kinda like the idea of dragging homo... wait did I type that?!
Daniel, I think I'm confused what your saying is praising God for the creation is worshiping God then yes definitely. Just praising creation however, is not praising God. And your right Daniel, Pocahontas (I think I spelled that right) was a pretty stupid movie.
I'm not quite sure I understand this. Since christians are told that there is one god (Your Old testament there are a lot of thiings that make a lot of sense) and christains believe in Jesus. Not quite sure what that means plus if some random person said this daniel than you wouldn't care. So...
It's pretty funny how giantic miracles happened 2000years ago, in a time where stories were told to each other over and over again. (creating a different version of the original one)
And now, when we have Media to actually prove things, nothing happens.
Hey, where's Lbert gone?
hopefully, to iraq.
ISLAM?
JUDAISM?
THOSE ARE FALSE???
What the fuck? Am I missing something here? Who said anything about "Black Hebrews" anyway??
Colin | 11.29.05 - 12:13 pm
sorry for going off topic, but i gotta clear something up so i don't sound like the village idiot.
bush200041 had made a list of religions he thought were false, those three being amoung them. that was the post i was responding to. however, his post must have been deleted because you guys obviously didn't see it.
sorry for going off topic, just had to clear that up
No k, I'm pretty sure I've got that role down pat.
When will the MarioKart Spoof be ready. I'm just looking for a year.
Drew--Think about it this way. If someone says my art is cool, they are actually praising my skill as an artist (not that too many people would do that) -- just like if someone praises nature and there is some divine creator, then they would be praising that creator's skill. It's simple, like that. Praise the art and you are praising the artist. Simple.
Just like when I say there are really good animations on Ebolaworld, I'm actually crediting Sam T as being a really good animator.
Future President-I don't follow you.
take care,
daniel
Caveman -
How do you figure the media could actually "prove" a miracle? Miracles by their very nature are unprovable. You can't gather scientific evidence about a miracle -- if you could, it wouldn't be a miracle.
Oddly, there are thousands upon thousands of documented miraculous, unexplained occurences involving healings, money, etc seemingly induced by prayer. You can look at medical records of terminal cancer patients who've been healed completely without relapse or treatment etc. The thing is, since they're such an exception and it's pretty hard to videotape cancer dissappearing from the body it doesn't get much press. Also I doubt the mainstream media would be very interested in Jane NoNames miraculous healing. There's no drama and ultimately "it don't sell papers".
Factor into this the fact that a healing is just postponing the inevitable....
Find the logical fallacy in the statements below. :D
1) God is by definition beyond human understanding.
2) If God causes something, then it is caused by something beyond human understanding (God).
3) If there is something that humans don't understand, it means that it is caused by God. Once a single human being anywhere understands it, it is not caused by God anymore.
Esn,
Good point. You're absolutely right - just because we don't understand something doesn't mean it's caused by God and further, just because we DO understand something doesn't mean it's NOT caused by God. The logical fallacy is that just because one cannot understand God does not mean that one cannot understand the things that God enacts. Just as one might not understand my point of view but fully understands why I need to piss at least once a day.
However, by it's very nature, a "miracle" is something caused by the supernatural and unprovable by man. Therefore, the media could not "prove" a miracle. The very meaning of the word is "a marvellous event manifesting a supernatural act of God."
peace yo,
daniel
Daniel, you're right on almost everything. What I'm not quite sure about is "worshipping" the creation is always about gloryfying God. From what I grasp, if you just glorify the creation without paying attention to God, then you're not giving glory to God but to the creation. However, your definitely right that if you praise God for the creation then yes you do bring him glory and honor.
On the subject of miracles Daniel, you're also right. God used miracles in the Bible to prove a point. One example of this would be John 9, the story of the blindman, Jesus made the claim to be the light of the world. Right after he made this claim he healed a blind man on the side of the road as an example or as evidence to the people. He used this as evidence to the people that he was who he claimed he was. In the Old Testament God performed many many miracles to prove that he was sovereign and worthy of praise. So, a miracle is a supernatural act of God that cannot be explained by scientifical research and is an action of God to prove to us that he exists.
note: Daniel what I just said about miracles was not meant as a contrast or a differing opinion or an argument, it was more an addition to your definition.
hello? anyone here?
I was at a dog training program and they said if a dog was about to stop obeying you release it from its command so it willl still listen to you. So is that what god was trying to do when he siad the world is yours. Give us an inch.
Drew - don't worry ... I tend to know when I'm being agreed with.
best,
daniel
if find it funny that in the early years of the christain church, the roman belives were so wide spread because if you didnt pray to roman gods, they would kill you. now the cristian churchs are so large because if you arnt a christian, their god will appaerently kill you.
God loves you, but if you do somthing he doesn't like, he will send you to eternal damnation. confusing?
oops above wa from me
Ummm... Fleming, I'm gonna be rather frank about this (although I'd much rather be Drew I'll be frank for a little bit). The Catholic Church, is pretty corrupt. In fact, it's been corrupt ever since Constantine established it. The idea of government forcing you into a religion is one of the major reasons the US was formed. As for God sending you to eternal damnation, quite frankly (there I go again), you're lucky you aren't there already. You see God is perfect, man is not. There is no way that we can exist in front of God unless we are perfect. That's why Jesus (Son of God and Son of Man) came and died and ROSE AGAIN so we could LIVE and not DIE. All you have to do is believe and then commit your life to Him. Otherwise, yes you will go to hell. No middleground. You can find what I said in the scriptures. If you don't believe me go study and find out for yourself.
I gotta agree with Drew here.
Why did God create man with inperfections if man was to be perfect in order to live along side God??
If God loves us than why can't he get rid of our bad qualities. That way, we could all go to paradise, and deserve it too.
Frankly the reason might possibly be that this is all a load of crap and just a way to keep people in line.
colin... cause god screwed up.
Let me be clear, God did NOT create us this way. God created man and woman perfect in a perfect garden in a perfect world. God told them they could eat whatever they wanted except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Well, Satan (an angel who rebelled against God) was in this garden also in the form of a serpent. This serpent came to Eve (the woman) and tempted her to eat the fruit with Adam standing right there. They ate the fruit and disobeyed God. Actions that disobey God are called sins. Now God is perfect (FP), and as perfect He is: righteous, loving, kind, powerful, sovereign, etc. (I could give you a really long list but I think I'll pass). Now because he is righteous he cannot allow sin to go unpunished. In fact, he cannot exist in the presence of sin because he is perfect. Romans 6:23 says, "for the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." So, because God is also merciful he gave us a way out other than death and eternal separation from Him. All we have to do is believe that Jesus Christ was sent to earth to die and rise and save us from our sins and commit our lives to God.
But why can't God better us? And if God is so omnipotent, why does Satan exist? Wouldn't God be more rightous if he destroyed Satan?
You know, I read somewhere that originally Satan was just a minor angel of judgement, sent from God as an Accuser, like a prosecuting attorney, for man's sins. Yea, it was in the Book of Job. Then the church absorbed the popular notion of Satan as the Devil from Zoroastrianism. I was also told that God allowed Satan to exist to give man a choice in life. And here's a question, Drew: if Christ was sent to Earth to allow the rest of humanity to live, how is it that humans and hominids existed and lived thousands of years before Christ? Furthermore, what was the point of letting Christ die if he was just going to be resurrected? Why didn't your God just make the choice to let humanity live, without the whole painful death on a piece of wood thing?
"But why can't God better us?"
Ummm... maybe you didn't hear me. God is just. That means that he has to be fair. He can't simply MAKE us better because that would not be just. If you read Revelation you would know that Satan is doomed. Revelation talks about the end of this world and the begginning of the next. This world is full of corruption and sin (as all of you have said) and therefore must be replaced. God will destroy Satan in the lake of fire at the end of Revelation. The thing is Revelation has not happened yet. No one knows when it will come but they know it will come.
"You see God is perfect, man is not."
1) God is perfect, therefore everything that God does must be perfect.
2) All of God's creations are perfect.
3) Mankind AND Satan are God's creations. Therefore, they are perfect.
4) Since God is beyond human understanding, humans cannot know what "perfection" means for God.
Any questions? Can anyone find a logical flaw with this reasoning?
By the way, you guys didn't get the point of my previous logical argument. If you are to take it on faith that something exists that is beyond any human's possibility to understand (ie. God) then you can't even begin to pretend that you know something about it. The logical fallacy was point #1.
If God is beyond human understanding, then anything that you think you may know about God, you don't actually know it. Anything that you think you may understand about God magically slips away from your grasp as soon as you learn it, because however much humans learn, God is beyond human understanding. See, it's a self-serving definition.
Other examples of this:
"All mainstream news reporters praised the President's address to the nation."
(all news reporters who did NOT praise it are not mainstream)
"All true Scots like Haggis."
(Scots who do not like Haggis are not true Scots)
"Without language there can be no thought."
(people who think in images or music are not actually "thinking", they're... ummm... *insert some newfangled word here that's not "thinking"*)
This is how many people make their living, by the way (especially business consultants and literary theorists); by simply redefining words. It's a very lucrative profession.
If Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity are going to be in heaven, count me out. 
esn--
The logical flaw in your argument is this: If something is created to perfection, that does not mean it is also indestructable. Drew's whole point is that though God created the world and everything in it perfectly, it has somehow become bent or broken.
And "perfection" is a fairly subjective word. It all depends on the principles and intents of the creator. Let me give an example: If I create a hammer to perfection, its purpose is to drive in nails. If it serves its function, it is a perfect hammer. However, a perfect hammer is NOT a perfect screwdriver. Further, if the user uses THE WRONG END of the hammer, it could dent or break the hammer and therefore make it imperfect.
Now, I'm sure you can agree with me that human beings and the angellic host are much more complicated than hammers and screw drivers. Drew's religion tells him that human beings were given free will -- aka the ability to bend and or break themselves by making decisions beyond God's purpose. The meaning of sin quite literally is "missing the mark".
Why doesn't God interfere with this human "self-mutilation"? Why would he? Perhaps His interference would only pervert his creation farther in that 1) It would negate or minimize our free will thereby making us mindless automatons 2) It would almost be a divine admission of a cosmic fuck-up.
As a parent, I find it necessary to delineate between my son's behavior and my teaching of him. Here's what I mean--If my 3 yr. old misbehaves I can either blame myself for not teaching him well enough or I can blame him for making a poor choice. It is important to me, as a father, to distinguish between the times that he "just doesn't know any better" and the times he is "willfully disobedient" to me. Obviously, the latter brings him more punishment and the former is used as an opportunity to teach him.
If we consider that God is a supreme father, it would stand to follow that He does something similar. Therefore, Jesus could be considered a divine "learning lesson" and that every act Jesus did could be a metaphor for the "true way to salvation". I believe this is what Drew was getting at as he blundered through the difference between justice and mercy.
To answer the question of "Why Jesus had to die and be resurrected instead of just skipping the whole death part?" Here goes:
The whole point of Jesus from a christian perspective is that He was a human who "made it". In other words a human who lived his entire life without bending or breaking himself. In other words, he lived his life to perfection. FULLY HUMAN are the key words. If he hadn't died, he wouldn't have been fully human, therefore negating his example to the rest of humanity that "it can be done". Jesus was a divine lesson -- something like, "See watch me and do what I do" sort of like I tell my son while I teach him to build with blocks "Watch how I do it and then you try it."
...and that's
all I have to say about that
best wishes,
daniel
Oops, one more thing.
If you're asking for classical logical fallacies I believe your arguments can be placed under "false assumptions".
Your false assumptions run as follows:
1) perfection = incorruptability
2) Inability to understand the fullness of something = Inability to understand something even in part.
I've explained my views on the first one in my post above.
Here's more detail on the second:
Noone can understand the fullness of anything, be it a tree or a rock. The Pauli Uncertainty principle has declared it impossible. It says something to the effect of "you can not know where a molecule is going and where it is located at the same time. You can either know one or the other." However, we DO understand all these things IN PART. We understand the nature of rocks and trees, their function in history and society, how they can be used for profit and art, etc. The same can be said of God. Though the FULLNESS of God is beyond human understanding that does not mean parts of God cannot be understood. Further, if God is a sensient being, He could choose to reveal parts of Himself to us. And we're back to "Just because you don't understand me doesn't mean you don't understand why I need to piss once a day."
Sorry for the long and heady post on a humor website
But, ask a stupid question...
take care,
daniel
If something is perfect, daniel, then it shouldn't be bent or broken. Something that is perfect shouldn't and can't be changed for the worse.
These kids are SIGNING UP for this. We don't need Bush to stop, he's too much of a shit for that. We need these guys to stop putting their name on a hit list
Karen what the hell. We're talking about the Christians and their demands.
Oh... sorry.
Anyways, if the christians want to start praying in school, ignore them. If god wanted us to worship him, he would have put it in a movie or a video game. NOT in a book.
He is all seeing, right? So make something we're attracted to.
And, furthermore, if something is perfect, they don't kill each other, fight, and do very diiiiiiiirrrrtty things. If the christians want to make our kids pray, I say we leave it up to the kids. If god wants us to, he wouldn't force us.
Let the Christians pray in school. They'll miss out for it. Just don't make me do it.
Exactly. Thank you, Colin.
Colin--What you're saying is false. Here are the definitions for the adjective "perfect":
1. Lacking nothing essential to the whole; complete of its nature or kind.
2. Being without defect or blemish: a perfect specimen.
3. Thoroughly skilled or talented in a certain field or area; proficient.
4. Completely suited for a particular purpose or situation: She was the perfect actress for the part.
5.
a. Completely corresponding to a description, standard, or type: a perfect circle; a perfect gentleman.
b. Accurately reproducing an original: a perfect copy of the painting.
6. Complete; thorough; utter: a perfect fool.
7. Pure; undiluted; unmixed: perfect red.
8. Excellent and delightful in all respects: a perfect day.
9. Botany. Having both stamens and pistils in the same flower; monoclinous.
10. Grammar. Of, relating to, or constituting a verb form expressing action completed prior to a fixed point of reference in time.
11. Music. Designating the three basic intervals of the octave, fourth, and fifth.
==========================
Nowhere in any dictionary does perfect = incorruptable. They are not synonyms. A thing can be created perfectly and then ruined. Period.
best wishes,
daniel
Colin--What you're saying is false. Here are the definitions for the adjective "perfect":
1. Lacking nothing essential to the whole; complete of its nature or kind.
2. Being without defect or blemish: a perfect specimen.
3. Thoroughly skilled or talented in a certain field or area; proficient.
4. Completely suited for a particular purpose or situation: She was the perfect actress for the part.
5.
a. Completely corresponding to a description, standard, or type: a perfect circle; a perfect gentleman.
b. Accurately reproducing an original: a perfect copy of the painting.
6. Complete; thorough; utter: a perfect fool.
7. Pure; undiluted; unmixed: perfect red.
8. Excellent and delightful in all respects: a perfect day.
9. Botany. Having both stamens and pistils in the same flower; monoclinous.
10. Grammar. Of, relating to, or constituting a verb form expressing action completed prior to a fixed point of reference in time.
11. Music. Designating the three basic intervals of the octave, fourth, and fifth.
==========================
Nowhere in any dictionary does perfect = incorruptable. They are not synonyms. A thing can be created perfectly and then ruined. Period.
best wishes,
daniel
sorry for the double post.
oops, I spelled "incorruptible" wrong. haha
I'd say Daniel hit this one on the head.
Drew.
If god created perfect beings than why did humans choose to disobey god and eat the fruit. Also why would god create humans in the first place? Perhaps because he wanted us to be corruptible. Perhaps god created us as entertainment for him/her/it.
FP
From a christian perspective, God wants to interact with His creation. If we were incorruptible, our obedience and faithfullness would be meaningless. Just like if you created a robot to have sex with you and decided to marry it - the marriage would be fairly meaningless (and so would the sex, for that matter).
This all assumes that God exists and is a sensient creative being.
take care,
daniel
As for humans, well, Satan tempted Adam and Eve with the prospect of being better than God. This is what compelled them to eat of the fruit.
Drew,
That's about half right. I don't agree with the whole "better than God" thing. If you dig a little deeper, you'll see that their problem wasn't greed. It was that they didn't fully trust what God told them. They were skeptics. God gave them only ONE explicit command and they decided to test their boundaries instead of just doing what they were told. This fits in more with the title of the tree: "The tree of the knowledge of good and evil." By willfully disobeying, they learned the difference between what is right and what is a mistake.
Of course, all of this is purely a matter of faith and completely unprovable.
best wishes,
daniel
I might add that skepticism and curiousity are not character "flaws". Therefore, Adam and Eve would still be perfect for having those feelings . They are magnificent things when used properly.
-daniel
guess what.. im gonna piss on this thread as well !
Wow. I guess I didn't know the definition of perfect.
As for this whole discussion, I ask why. Why are we here? Was God really bored? Is he playing SIMS with microorganisms? Why, did this "all powerful" being create us and the world?
Some people pray silently, what are we going to do? Tape their minds shut?
He created us because He is a social God. He doesn't just want us to follow rules, he wants us to KNOW HIM.
Colin- That's pretty funny Philosophers and theologians have been asking those questions for millenia and have no real good answer. The only thing I could GUESS would be that God finds it in His nature to be creative. Who knows?
Drew - I'm pretty sure you have no real basis for that pat answer. Your answer begs the question, "Well, why didn't He just create other gods, then?"
cordially,
daniel
HAHAHAHA!!!!!
"He doesn't just want us to follow rules, he wants us to KNOW HIM."
drew, do you remember my post on the 600 thread?
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/know
look at the 3rd definition.
"As for this whole discussion, I ask why. Why are we here? Was God really bored? Is he playing SIMS with microorganisms? Why, did this "all powerful" being create us and the world?"
I find that in pretty much any situation, asking "how" will get you much more usefull results than asking "why".
I guess that's why I'm not religious.
I want to personally ask you CHRISTIANS how you can believe in a religion that based on the absurd belief in the Trinity.
Christ, according to the faith, is the second person in the Trinity, the Father being the first and the Holy Ghost third. Each of these persons is God. Christ is his own father and his own son. The Holy Ghost is neither father nor son, but both. The son was begotten by the father, but existed before he was begotten--just the same before as after. Christ is just as old as his father, and the father is just as young as his son. The Holy Ghost proceeded from the Father and Son, but was equal to the Father and Son before he proceeded, that is to say, before he existed, but he is of the same age as the other two. So it is declared that the Father is God, and the Son and the Holy Ghost is God, and these three Gods make one God. According to the imaginary multiplication table, once one is three, and three times one is one, and according to heavenly subtraction if we take two from three, three are left. The addition is equally peculiar: if we add two to one we have but one. Each one equal to himself and to the other two. Nothing ever was, nothing ever can be more perfectly absurd than the dogma of the Trinity. Why do you set your salvation based on something so doubtful? Again, 1+1+1=3 not 1 and again salvation is not based on your wishful thinking. I also want ask you why you can't just stop at the statement God is one in essence?why do you have to go beyond this? : If you go to any dictionary, and look up the word monotheism you will never find the definition the belief in one God but three in person? I mean come on. When will you finally understand this? That in itself is a contradictory statement no matter how much you try to play around with logic.
Amro,
However, 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1 .
That's the oversimplified mathematical proof of the belief. 3/3 = 1 whole.
It's like an egg. An egg has a shell, a yoke and an eggwhite. These 3 parts make up 1 egg.
best wishes,
daniel
ps. A more accurate example would be that of a human being. In classical thought, a person was made up of a mind, a body and a spirit. These 3 things made 1 man. You could consider a man to be made "in the image of God" in this light. The mind would be God the Father, the body would be God the Son (Jesus) and the spirit would be The Comforter (or Holy Spirit). If you can accept the belief that humans have 3 distinct but overlapping parts (mind, body, spirit) it is not too big of a stretch to accept it about God.
Again, these are strictly matters of faith and unprovable by any scientific method.
daniel,
Chistianity = Hinduism? If the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit are parts of God, than doesn't it relate to the Hindu belief that different gods like Vishnu and Shiva are pieces of Bhraman?
Colin,
You're absolutely right. Many many religions share similar beliefs.
For instance, reading the Dhammapada is very similar to reading the Psalms.
This tends to lend itself to the idea that there is one God and He has been sending messages to all of humanity throughout time. I know Drew won't like or agree with what I'm saying; but, it's something I've found to be true.
take care,
daniel
ps. A key difference between what I was saying and your example of Vishnu and Shiva is that The Father, Son and Holy Spirit OVERLAP. Just as a person's mind body and spirit do. They were never broken apart like Vishnu and Shiva were.
I wonder what happens if you put things into the Email and URL fields
There is no such thing as a plurality of persons in the Godhead. We introduce a plurality when we use the word 'persons'. Anyone who pictures 3 different persons in their minds and then say with their mouths that they are really one cannot help but be confused. They say one thing but are actually thinking another. Anyone with such an understanding of the Godhead are polytheistic in their thinking regardless that they may say that God is one in order to align their verbal confession with the Bible. It is important to begin the Shema with a declaration of the Oneness of God because it is only possible to give the love of all our heart, soul, mind and strength to One. It is not humanly possible to do so for 3 or more. This only leads to confusion. Our God is not the author of confusion. He never changes(Malachi 3:6) . He is still One now as He was One then.
Amro,
That is correct from the standpoint of judaism. Schma Israel Adonai Elehenu, Adonai Echad.
My point is, that you are ONE PERSON yet you also have a hand, a foot, a brain, blood, billions of cells in your body. All of these things are seperate but overlapping PARTS of you. Christians believe that God has revealed three distinct parts of Himself to us. That just as He "dwelled among us" during the exodus, He also dwelled as ONE OF US in Jesus. And now He dwells WITHIN US as the Holy Spirit. The old covenant still stands for the faithful; but God has formed a New Covenant for those not included in the Law and the Prophets.
"so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God."
best wishes,
daniel
ps. For those of you a bit lost. Here's a very useful link: http://www.jewfaq.org/
Colin, what the fuck do you think happens?
It submits it next to your name.
GOOD JOB. YOU WIN THE TROPHY.
Okay then.
Daniel why don't christians just say its one god instead of the trinity?
FP,
Christians DO say it's one God. The trinity is a way of describing the aspects of that one God.
Let me know if you'd like a more in depth explanation. For now I have some other work to attend to.
take care,
daniel
Lbert.
Just so you know, my thinger got cut off.
But, it still would have had the same meaning :D
But why shame on me?
Because I don't share your political veiws? And how is Sam T Satan?
He's just expressing his opinion about a certain group of people.
Daniel and friends,
WHY THERE'S ONLY ONE GOD:
There is unity in nature(i.e. the United States of America) it is by nature that people incline towards unity that is why when a particular people are united they become more powerful. Imagine the United States being divided into three nations and called the Trinitarian States of America, do you really believe that our country would be as strong as it is now. Imagine our resources being divided into three parts, our military into three parts and our population into three parts, even if we say that we are coalition of 3 nations it will still not be the same as one country united and indivisible. God puts forth a Parable a man belonging to many partners at variance with each other, and a man belonging entirely to one master: are those two equal in comparison?. So the difference between the creed of Polytheism(Trinity) and the Gospel of Unity Is explained by the analogy of two men. One belongs to many masters; the masters disagree among themselves, and the poor man of many masters has to suffer from the quarrel of his many masters; it is an impossible and unnatural position. The other serves only one Master(God), his Master is good, and does all He can for His servant; the servant can concentrate his attention on his service; he is happy himself and his service is efficiently performed. Can there be any doubt as to (1) which of them is the happier, and (2) which of them is in a more natural position? No man can serve two, still less numerous than three, masters.
BY THE WAY I'M A UNITARIAN (CHRISTIANS RESPONSE: GASP!!!GET HIM!!!)
Anonymous Unitarian,
Ummm. I think your example actually proves my point. Last I checked our United States government was divided into 3 seperate, equal, overlapping sections. They are the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches of government. Also, our United states have FIFTY different governements of their own. We are UNITED as ONE NATION divided under 3 Federal governmental branches and FIFTY state governments ALL WORKING TOGETHER.
Welcome to 5th grade US History.
take care,
daniel
ps This is the first time that all branches of Federal government have been unified under one party (the republican party) and instead of that unification STRENGTHENING our country, it has weakened it (by almost any account).
PPS Our Military IS divided into Army, Navy, Airforce and Marines and not to mention the seperation of special forces units such as rangers delta's and seals.
The point I'm making, is that One thing can have many facets or play many roles. Much like a simple cube has 6 faces. An Infinite God must have MANY facets. He has chosen to play 3 distinct roles in History. Those are the roles of the old Covenant (God the Father), Jesus (God the son) and the New Covenant (God the Holy Spirit). They are all the same God -- interacting with humans in 3 different ways.
I give your argument an F-- . (Especially since I don't mind that you're a unitarian any more than I mind Kyora is a Wiccan or Amro believes in Judaism or that Sam T is an Athiest. I believe that God created the universe and therefore there is a measure of truth in all things. It is up to us to seperate the wheat from the chaff, as it were.)
take care,
daniel
Sorry, one more thing and then I'm done.
As far as nature is concerned:
Consider: What is the most reliable, constructive shape in the universe?
Here's a hint: The designers of the great pyramids based entire temples upon it. Also, the skeleton of the statue of liberty is riddled with this shape.
Give up? IT'S the TRIANGLE! One shape, 3 sides.
If nature lends itself towards unity, then why is there such biodiversity on the planet and such odd and mysterious variances in the vast expanses of space?
Surely if nature lent itself toward unity we'd all just be one giant mass of photosynthetic algae, right?
no rest for the wicked,
daniel
Daniel,
I read your in-depth explanation and I must say it makes a lot of sense. Just one question. If God is perfect and God is represented in three parts then why does God need or want Jesus. God has humans and God is perfect so it's not like he needs help running the heavens and earth. Even if he did (This would be a flaw, a minor flaw, but still a flaw) need help why send Jesus to earth in the first place? I mean God would probably know what would happen in the firs place since god is all knowing. Plus how would Jesus dying help us. Just like you said with the robot it would be meaningless because he had no choice (assuming he wasn't hanging around in heaven before birth to mary) and why would Jesus's death help anyway?
"Here's a hint: The designers of the great pyramids based entire temples upon it. Also, the skeleton of the statue of liberty is riddled with this shape.
Give up? IT'S the TRIANGLE! One shape, 3 sides."
Actualy, it's the three dimentional pyramid with four sides. But what ever.
FP,
I think you missed part of my point. Jesus is PART of the trinity (or one of the ways God has chosen to interact with humanity). If you read farther back in this thread I explain the whole point of Jesus life as both fully human and fully God.
In the old testament, God dwelt among his people during the Exodus. He literally had them set up a tent in the center of their camp as a way to say "Look, God is there right over your shoulder. Shape up."
The Israelites still didn't get the message and screwed up big time.
Christians believe that the next step in the progression was Jesus. The believe that Jesus is "God incarnate". In other words, fully human and fully God. This is God's way of saying, "see, I went through all the shit that anyone else goes through and I still made it through PERFECTLY." If Jesus hadn't died, then he wouldn't have been fully human thereby nullifying his example "that it is possible to be human and not fuck up once in your entire life". Jesus is the example for the world that it can be done. If he hadn't been human - and mortal - his example would've been meaningless.
Further, Jesus did have a choice just like any other fully mortal being. The theology goes that if he would have sinned at all during his life, once he died, he would've stayed dead. That is why the resurrection is so meaningful to christians. It is proof that he didn't fuck up.
Jesus wasn't about God's needs, it was about humans needing to see that it can be done and that God cares about them enough to go through everything they went through. Jesus was a testament to God's love and understanding. The other edge to the sword is that it "leaves us without excuse." Forcing us to put God back in His place in our minds. Obviously, WE FUCK UP. So, we need the grace of God to cover us for the times we "miss the mark".
One must not make the mistake of confusing being "all-knowing" with "having an iron clutch on the future". I believe that God has given us more power than we'd like to think. A power to alter the course of history. He has left it up to us to decide. That is free will. God holds the keys to the future, but I believe He chooses not to look to far and often leaves us to our own devices. He is an all-powerful, all-seeing God who wishes to INTERACT with creation, not CONTROL creation.
(I think there's a word limit so I'll post more in a sec.)
Christians believe that Jesus (as both God and man) helped create a "new covenant" between humanity and God. This new covenant is evidenced by The Holy Spirit (or the comforter). So here is the progression so far:
1) God dwells AMONG US during the exodus.
2) God dwells AS ONE OF US in Jesus.
The next logical step is quite daring. Christians believe that now
3) God dwells WITHIN US as the holy spirit.
As you can see, it is a very logical progression for a loving God who wants to interact with His creation.
I hope this very lengthy, in depth post answers most of your questions.
best wishes,
daniel
Colin,
Pyramids are comprised of triangles, or 4 triangles and a square (which is just two right triangles stuck together)
,
daniel
How do you know so much about reliegon (spelled wrong?), daniel?
Colin,
Well, the simple answer is that it interests me and I study it. I've also been lucky to study under some good teachers and have a family who encourages me to think for myself.
take care,
daniel
isn't putting a star on top of a christmas tree sacriligious(yes i know i proboly spelled that wrong)? isn't that like putting a pentogram on top of your tree?
The star, I believe, represents the Star of David rather than its Satanic counterpart.
yea, but still, it looks like a pentogram.
In medieval symbolism the pentacle (star without a circle around it) was a symbol of purity. The "satanic star" is an upside down pentogram (a star WHITH a circle around it)
cheers,
daniel
-- The star of David is a six pointed star.
the others only have five.
Gee, mister wizard, that's swell.
Yeah, I can magically bake cookies too :D
???
you do that.
Wow... I mean, I'm a Christian, but reading that website just made me feel sick. Seriously, some Christians need help. Especially with that email from that Mike guy. Seriously, he was making some reasonable suggestions in a all-together constructive way. He's talking about how he feels saying stuff like "We're going to pray for your soul." is a thinly veiled insult, and these people just turn around and do just that. I can't believe it... "Please pray for Mike." Argh... it's just the way that they say it that annoys me so much.
Daniel,
Ok, I will just have to take your word for it, being jewish, but in the old testament (for you, my torah) bbut the tabernacle was the first synagouge. God sent a cloud that showed the way for the israelites to get out of the dessert (even if it did take 40 years). God was not in the desert with the israelites. Also if in the christian religion Jesus (who is god) formed a new covenat with humans it would be meaningles since humans didn't agree.
FP,
Exodus 25:8 says, "Then have them make a sanctuary for me, and I will DWELL AMONG THEM."
Exodus 29:45-46 says, "Then I will DWELL AMONG the Israelites and be their God, who brought them out of Egypt so that I might DWELL AMONG THEM. I am the Lord their God."
(emphasis added to both quotes)
Check them out in the Torah. There are several more references to this; but, I figured I'd just give you those two as examples. I believe the translation is accurate.
As to your second point about a new covenant, this is what many christians call "being saved". They are quite literally AGREEING to the new covenant in their "prayer of salvation". Hence, the covenant is meaningful to those who agree to it.
peace be with you,
daniel
Daniel
Yes the cloud shows this. Also in exodus is when god talks to moses. This happens a fair amount but this is when god first alks to moses. Moses says something along the lines of let me see you as proof. God says no mortal can gaze upon my face, but you can see my after. Which I take to mean after pressence God leaves when journeying through a mortal place. Hence the cloud.
Plus how would historians and Priests know that Jesus is God. Oral history being somewhat unreliable. So how do you know that Jesus led a sinless life. Also where did the new testament come from (God, some Priest, a pope) because where it comes from can determine it's reliability.
With regards,
Future President
FP,
Wow. You're full of questions.
I disagree with your interpretation of "the pillar of cloud" as some sort of "divine wake" - like a boat leaves a wake as it goes through the water. God placed a pillar of fire by night and a pillar of cloud by day to let the Israelites know He was there with them and to notify them of when He wanted them to move. God also appeared to Moses as a burning bush. He appeared to Elijah as "the sound of sheer silence" (or "a still small voice" as some interpreters have it).
I also disagree with you about no mortal being able to look upon God. In Exodus 24:9, 74 people were reported to have looked upon God and were not struck down.
Regarding the origins of the new testament:
Like the Old Testament, the New is comprised of several books by several different authors. If you're asking specifically about the "Gospels" (or stories about Jesus), Mathew, Mark and John were written by Jesus's disciples (although there's some question about the origin of John). Luke and Acts were written by a greek physician who was investigating the incidents of Jesus's life and the lives of christian leaders after his death. Less than one generation had passed before most of these accounts were written down. The latest of the gospels was written around 80 c.e. This means you have eyewitness accounts going into these writings. Oral tradition really had nothing to do with the New Testament.
The majority of the rest of the books are letters written by various authors (but mainly Paul) to various churches in the world. Paul was a Jewish priest before converting to christianity. If memory serves, he was a member of the Sanhedran.
In the book of Luke, John the Baptist asks a similar question to what you're asking about Jesus. He asks, "Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?"
Jesus replies to the messengers, "Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor. Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me." These are all things the messiah was supposed to do according to Isaiah (chpt's 29,35, and 61).
Basically, they knew because of what they saw and the prophecies that seemed to be coming to life before their eyes.
I guess, beyond eyewitness accounts, Jesus'a own testimony, and the testimonies of the saints throughout the last 2000 years, belief, like any belief is a matter of faith. At some point you have to ask yourself the question, "if someone somehow scientifically proved that Jesus was the son of God, would that change my life or my mind ... really?"
If you're really interested in all of this, I suggest you visit a local church and ask to borrow one of their Bibles. Most churches these days have small libraries. Also, most pastor's and priests are very open to an
-cut off my post -- here's the rest.
Also, most pastor's and priests are very open to answering the questions of the curious. Check out the book of Luke. I'm partial to it because I can see the methodical investigation behind the writing. Acts is good, too, and sums up the early church nicely.
Also, feel free to email me at danielml@danielml.com .
with best wishes,
daniel
Thanks I think I will read at least some of acts.
With Regards,
Future President
uhhh........
It's funny it's underground, when this miniority sure is vocal and above ground.
Why doesn't the ACLU support the second amendment?
Commenting by HaloScan
