Christianity QA » Christian God » Our Terminal Disease
Question:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – message {snip} All crimes (sins) are against God and no crime against God can of its nature be finite. Interesting assertion. That really puts us on thin ice. And more people should be mindful of the fact.
Its not a fact. Facts can be proven. Steve Zodiac
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – message {snip} All crimes (sins) are against God and no crime against God can of its nature be finite. Interesting assertion. That really puts us on thin ice. And more people should be mindful of the fact. Its not a fact. Facts can be proven.
Is that so? One would have thought that for any formal axiomatic system, there is always another statement which is true but which cannot be proven in the system. — The Legion of Decency exists to promote a society that is mindful of God by facing the evils of the world. Visit our website to learn more: http://www.legionofdecency.org
Response:
Dave, It is obvious you do not know the truth of the scriptures; the true interpretation and the true translation.
It is obvious that YOU don’t know me, then. And I gave enough clues, I thought. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The people of God possess a certain "station" in life which is a particular life structured by the principles of God. The "angel" is merely a minister or messenger as was originally written. The "fiery sword of truth" is the act of using the tongue/words as a sword is used, to present words that "burn the ears" of those addressed. It is a way of attacking the evil in a person and destroying the sin/evil with truth. No person is able to return to this station in life Adam fell away from until the evil is removed from the mind and the truth is restored, including the higher principles of God that structure this life of peace, love and joy. Religionists do not know this truth for they are not of God; not taught by God; have not passed through this "fiery sword." The metaphor is the same as refining gold by fire; by melting the ore and extracting the gold by separation. This is a cleansing process, removing all that is not truth from the mind and building the mind up in truth. DW Suiter Son of God
I have no strong argument with this, except, like the term "evolutionist," I suspect your term "religionist" is just a catch-all for anyone in an organized religion. Don’t give up on churches just because so many of them are scams. The real thing still exists. — Dave Oldridge ICQ 1800667 Paradoxically, most real events are highly improbable.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – message message {snip} All crimes (sins) are against God and no crime against God can of its nature be finite. Interesting assertion. That really puts us on thin ice. And more people should be mindful of the fact. Its not a fact. Facts can be proven. Is that so? One would have thought that for any formal axiomatic system, there is always another statement which is true but which cannot be proven in the system.
Is that so? Too bad the assertion of going to hell doesn’t fall into the category of formal axiomatic systems since it is not self evident by any stretch of the imagination. To say that people are going to hell for rejecting the Judeao Christian God is an assertion that cannot be tested. Nor is it without reasonable doubt. It falls short of being a fact. Steve Zodiac
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [...] sz For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten sz Son, that whosoever does not believeth in him should shall sz perish into eternal hellfire. sz Now we have a conundrum. Eternal punishment for a finite sz crime. Gods love is very conditional it would seem. This is an illogical conclusion. The text in question is not speaking of God’s love other than that he had so much of it that he sacrificed his own son. sz Please expand on the point that killing your own son in order sz to appease yourself is an expression of love. I am not judging whether it is or is not an expression of love. The sentence was merely being examined illogically by previous posters; this was corrected. A logical analysis does not allow you to change the word ‘love’ to ‘hate,’ and that’s all that was being said. I have no interest in offering my _personal_ _opinion_ on the matter.
fair enough – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It sounds quite unconditional – nothing was held back, not even his own son. sz You are forgetting the one blatant condition that hade to be sz met. A blood sacrifice of a son to himself for the atonment of sz sin caused by the very free will that was part of our sz reality. This is nothing short of god playing with himself. That may be your interpretation, and you’re certainly entitled to it. It’s not that I forgot about it; it simply is not addressed in the text in question. You’re trying to expand your argument beyond it, it would seem, and as stated above, I’m not interested in getting into the discussion when we move beyond the text in question. There will probably be others who will engage you in this discussion, though…
fair enough – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – sz We still go to hell if we reject god whether Jesus existed or sz not. No one pays for our sins but us. What can be logically stated to be conditional here is God’s mercy. sz Thats not logical because mercy is a quality of love and sz unconditional love should include infinite mercy. Mercy is a quality of love, yes, but not the only quality. There is no reason it should be infinite, because then love would consist only of mercy, making it no longer love, or worthy of the name. It would simply be mercy. Mercy is said to be extended to those who have accepted God’s system of grace, and denied to those who refuse it, since they must meet God’s justice on their own… sz So we’ve noticed. Thats conditional love no matter what the sz semantics. That may be your opinion, but it is not a position supported by the text in question.
The text unfortunately does not support anything, it merely makes an assertion. Steve Zodiac
Response:
Dave, It is obvious you do not know the truth of the scriptures; the true interpretation and the true translation. The people of God possess a certain "station" in life which is a particular life structured by the principles of God. The "angel" is merely a minister or messenger as was originally written. The "fiery sword of truth" is the act of using the tongue/words as a sword is used, to present words that "burn the ears" of those addressed. It is a way of attacking the evil in a person and destroying the sin/evil with truth. No person is able to return to this station in life Adam fell away from until the evil is removed from the mind and the truth is restored, including the higher principles of God that structure this life of peace, love and joy. Religionists do not know this truth for they are not of God; not taught by God; have not passed through this "fiery sword." The metaphor is the same as refining gold by fire; by melting the ore and extracting the gold by separation. This is a cleansing process, removing all that is not truth from the mind and building the mind up in truth. DW Suiter Son of God
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (J [...] sz You are right, the reasoning is flawed but the facts remain. When one uses flawed reasons, we don’t call such statements ‘facts.’ True statements are the ones that appellation is applied to. What results from flawed reasoning are false statements, which are called errors. sz For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten sz Son, that whosoever does not believeth in him should shall sz perish into eternal hellfire. sz Now we have a conundrum. Eternal punishment for a finite sz crime. Gods love is very conditional it would seem. This is an illogical conclusion. The text in question is not speaking of God’s love other than that he had so much of it that he sacrificed his own son. It sounds quite unconditional – nothing was held back, not even his own son. What can be logically stated to be conditional here is God’s mercy. Mercy is said to be extended to those who have accepted God’s system of grace, and denied to those who refuse it, since they must meet God’s justice on their own… sz Steve Zodiac // J Shoemaker You are absolutly correct and congratulations. Trying to persuade these God-haters is really not worth while I find. They are not going to change until it is too late I fear. But what about your own hatred of God? Are you going to give it up bofer I post because others such as yourself read them and respond with logic, information and believablity. Translation, they agree with and support your sins. Justice vs Mercy Unless perfectly balanced, these two principles result in evil. Justice without mercy becomes cruelty. Mercy without justice becomes licence. 1st comes God’s justice because He is Just. After guilt or innocence is determined then comes His Mercy. Pretty much as should be with our juris prudence system. Many people want mercy without justice. And many others want justice without mercy. And if you REALLY understood Genesis you would know what I’m talking about. But your way to the tree of life is still barred by the angel with the sword! — Dave Oldridge ICQ 1800667 Paradoxically, most real events are highly improbable.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [...] sz You are right, the reasoning is flawed but the facts remain. When one uses flawed reasons, we don’t call such statements ‘facts.’ True statements are the ones that appellation is applied to. What results from flawed reasoning are false statements, which are called errors. sz For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten sz Son, that whosoever does not believeth in him should shall sz perish into eternal hellfire. sz Now we have a conundrum. Eternal punishment for a finite sz crime. Gods love is very conditional it would seem. This is an illogical conclusion. The text in question is not speaking of God’s love other than that he had so much of it that he sacrificed his own son.
Please expand on the point that killing your own son in order to appease yourself is an expression of love. It sounds quite unconditional – nothing was held back, not even his own son.
You are forgetting the one blatant condition that hade to be met. A blood sacrifice of a son to himself for the atonment of sin caused by the very free will that was part of our reality. This is nothing short of god playing with himself. We still go to hell if we reject god whether Jesus existed or not. No one pays for our sins but us. What can be logically stated to be conditional here is God’s mercy.
Thats not logical because mercy is a quality of love and unconditional love should include infinite mercy. Mercy is said to be extended to those who have accepted God’s system of grace, and denied to those who refuse it, since they must meet God’s justice on their own…
So we’ve noticed. Thats conditional love no matter what the semantics. Steve Zodiac
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [...] sz You are right, the reasoning is flawed but the facts remain. When one uses flawed reasons, we don’t call such statements ‘facts.’ True statements are the ones that appellation is applied to. What results from flawed reasoning are false statements, which are called errors. sz For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten sz Son, that whosoever does not believeth in him should shall sz perish into eternal hellfire. sz Now we have a conundrum. Eternal punishment for a finite sz crime. Gods love is very conditional it would seem. This is an illogical conclusion. The text in question is not speaking of God’s love other than that he had so much of it that he sacrificed his own son. It sounds quite unconditional – nothing was held back, not even his own son. What can be logically stated to be conditional here is God’s mercy. Mercy is said to be extended to those who have accepted God’s system of grace, and denied to those who refuse it, since they must meet God’s justice on their own… sz Steve Zodiac // J Shoemaker You are absolutly correct and congratulations. Trying to persuade these God-haters is really not worth while I find. They are not going to change until it is too late I fear.
Scare tactics are for the gullible fundies. I post because others such as yourself read them and respond with logic, information and believablity.
Illogical, misinformation, and blind faith. That about sums it up. Justice vs Mercy 1st comes God’s justice because He is Just.
No he is not, go tell that to a child with AIDs. Your typicall fundie believes in the great flood which makes god the biggest mass murderer of all time. He hasn’t done anything to save anyone. And he is certainly incapalble of protecting children. Thats because he is fiction. After guilt or innocence is determined then comes His Mercy. Pretty much as should be with our juris prudence system.
If god is truly capable of ending suffering then he is criminally negligent. Steve Zodiac
Response:
{snip} All crimes (sins) are against God and no crime against God can of its nature be finite. Interesting assertion. That really puts us on thin ice.
And more people should be mindful of the fact. — The Legion of Decency exists to promote a society that is mindful of God by facing the evils of the world. Visit our website to learn more: http://www.legionofdecency.org
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (J [...] John 3:16 rb For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten rb Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but rb have everlasting life. rb Of course you realize that inverse of this makes just as much rb sense: rb (1) For God so hated the world, (2) that he gave his only rb begotten Son, that whosoever did not believeth in him should rb perish and go to hell. rb True? No. The second portion can be logically changed to its inverse as you have done since it only deals with consequences of a stated action. Since you have inverted the action, you are entitled to reverse the consequence as well to keep it all synchronized. Part one, however, cannot be logically changed from ‘loved’ to ‘hated,’ since there is no basis in logic for doing so, since by leaving part two effectively identical, you have not changed the result and therefor have no reason to assume a change to part one should take place at all. Your reasoning is flawed in this case… You are right, the reasoning is flawed but the facts remain. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever does not believeth in him should shall perish into eternal hellfire. Now we have a conundrum. Eternal punishment for a finite crime. Gods love is very conditional it would seem. All crimes (sins) are against God and no crime against God can of its nature be finite.
Interesting assertion. That really puts us on thin ice. Steve Zodiac
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (J [...] sz You are right, the reasoning is flawed but the facts remain. When one uses flawed reasons, we don’t call such statements ‘facts.’ True statements are the ones that appellation is applied to. What results from flawed reasoning are false statements, which are called errors. sz For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten sz Son, that whosoever does not believeth in him should shall sz perish into eternal hellfire. sz Now we have a conundrum. Eternal punishment for a finite sz crime. Gods love is very conditional it would seem. This is an illogical conclusion. The text in question is not speaking of God’s love other than that he had so much of it that he sacrificed his own son. It sounds quite unconditional – nothing was held back, not even his own son. What can be logically stated to be conditional here is God’s mercy. Mercy is said to be extended to those who have accepted God’s system of grace, and denied to those who refuse it, since they must meet God’s justice on their own… sz Steve Zodiac // J Shoemaker You are absolutly correct and congratulations. Trying to persuade these God-haters is really not worth while I find. They are not going to change until it is too late I fear.
But what about your own hatred of God? Are you going to give it up bofer I post because others such as yourself read them and respond with logic, information and believablity.
Translation, they agree with and support your sins. Justice vs Mercy
Unless perfectly balanced, these two principles result in evil. Justice without mercy becomes cruelty. Mercy without justice becomes licence. 1st comes God’s justice because He is Just. After guilt or innocence is determined then comes His Mercy. Pretty much as should be with our juris prudence system. Many people want mercy without justice.
And many others want justice without mercy. And if you REALLY understood Genesis you would know what I’m talking about. But your way to the tree of life is still barred by the angel with the sword! — Dave Oldridge ICQ 1800667 Paradoxically, most real events are highly improbable.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [...] sz You are right, the reasoning is flawed but the facts remain. When one uses flawed reasons, we don’t call such statements ‘facts.’ True statements are the ones that appellation is applied to. What results from flawed reasoning are false statements, which are called errors. sz For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten sz Son, that whosoever does not believeth in him should shall sz perish into eternal hellfire. sz Now we have a conundrum. Eternal punishment for a finite sz crime. Gods love is very conditional it would seem. This is an illogical conclusion. The text in question is not speaking of God’s love other than that he had so much of it that he sacrificed his own son. It sounds quite unconditional – nothing was held back, not even his own son. What can be logically stated to be conditional here is God’s mercy. Mercy is said to be extended to those who have accepted God’s system of grace, and denied to those who refuse it, since they must meet God’s justice on their own… sz Steve Zodiac // J Shoemaker
You are absolutly correct and congratulations. Trying to persuade these God-haters is really not worth while I find. They are not going to change until it is too late I fear. I post because others such as yourself read them and respond with logic, information and believablity. Justice vs Mercy 1st comes God’s justice because He is Just. After guilt or innocence is determined then comes His Mercy. Pretty much as should be with our juris prudence system. Many people want mercy without justice.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [...] John 3:16 rb For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten rb Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but rb have everlasting life. rb Of course you realize that inverse of this makes just as much rb sense: rb (1) For God so hated the world, (2) that he gave his only rb begotten Son, that whosoever did not believeth in him should rb perish and go to hell. rb True? No. The second portion can be logically changed to its inverse as you have done since it only deals with consequences of a stated action. Since you have inverted the action, you are entitled to reverse the consequence as well to keep it all synchronized. Part one, however, cannot be logically changed from ‘loved’ to ‘hated,’ since there is no basis in logic for doing so, since by leaving part two effectively identical, you have not changed the result and therefor have no reason to assume a change to part one should take place at all. Your reasoning is flawed in this case…
You are right, the reasoning is flawed but the facts remain. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever does not believeth in him should shall perish into eternal hellfire. Now we have a conundrum. Eternal punishment for a finite crime. Gods love is very conditional it would seem. Steve Zodiac
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [...] John 3:16 rb For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten rb Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but rb have everlasting life. rb Of course you realize that inverse of this makes just as much rb sense: rb (1) For God so hated the world, (2) that he gave his only rb begotten Son, that whosoever did not believeth in him should rb perish and go to hell. rb True? No. The second portion can be logically changed to its inverse as you have done since it only deals with consequences of a stated action. Since you have inverted the action, you are entitled to reverse the consequence as well to keep it all synchronized. Part one, however, cannot be logically changed from ‘loved’ to ‘hated,’ since there is no basis in logic for doing so, since by leaving part two effectively identical, you have not changed the result and therefor have no reason to assume a change to part one should take place at all. Your reasoning is flawed in this case… You are right, the reasoning is flawed but the facts remain. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever does not believeth in him should shall perish into eternal hellfire. Now we have a conundrum. Eternal punishment for a finite crime. Gods love is very conditional it would seem.
All crimes (sins) are against God and no crime against God can of its nature be finite. — The Legion of Decency exists to promote a society that is mindful of God by facing the evils of the world. Visit our website to learn more: http://www.legionofdecency.org
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our Terminal Disease When we become ill our first thought is what is causing this malady. We go to a doctor or clinic, get a check up and a diagnosis to try an uncover the cause. We reason that if there is a cause there might be a remedy to cure us. We will spend any amount of money(ours or someone elses including using other people’s body parts) to get treatment and hopefully a cure that will recover our health. Is this wrong? No, of course not. However, this exercise can be used for far more serious terminal disease-death. We all will eventually die, either from old age or an accident or a illness. There is no escape for anyone for we have heard the diagnosis of this uncurable disease. Some will rush out and try and find a physical remedy while others will turn to religions all to no avail. All this is what natural man does under these circumstances and that is understandable. We are all struck with the same illness because we are born with it. It is in our genes and we carry it with us where ever we go. It is called death. It cannot be denied for it is a scientific fact because it is observable and repeatable both in and out of the laboratory. It is reality. This is the bad news. There is also good news. And this good news if for anyone who looks, asks, seeks or knocks. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Of course you realize that inverse of this makes just as much sense: For God so hated the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever did not believeth in him should perish and go to hell. True?
quite Steve Zodiac
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our Terminal Disease When we become ill our first thought is what is causing this malady. We go to a doctor or clinic, get a check up and a diagnosis to try an uncover the cause. We reason that if there is a cause there might be a remedy to cure us. We will spend any amount of money(ours or someone elses including using other people’s body parts) to get treatment and hopefully a cure that will recover our health. Is this wrong? No, of course not. However, this exercise can be used for far more serious terminal disease-death. We all will eventually die, either from old age or an accident or a illness. There is no escape for anyone for we have heard the diagnosis of this uncurable disease. Some will rush out and try and find a physical remedy while others will turn to religions all to no avail. All this is what natural man does under these circumstances and that is understandable. We are all struck with the same illness because we are born with it. It is in our genes and we carry it with us where ever we go. It is called death. It cannot be denied for it is a scientific fact because it is observable and repeatable both in and out of the laboratory. It is reality. This is the bad news. There is also good news. And this good news if for anyone who looks, asks, seeks or knocks. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. All God could do to show his love is not relieve suffering and injustice but to *create* a *single* son (no big feat considering we are all his children) then sentence his son to death to appease himself so that he could forgive his beloved children for using their free will. This is what you call good news? I call it phcycosis. Steve Zodiac Perhaps it comes under the heading IGNORANCE?
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our Terminal Disease When we become ill our first thought is what is causing this malady. We go to a doctor or clinic, get a check up and a diagnosis to try an uncover the cause. We reason that if there is a cause there might be a remedy to cure us. We will spend any amount of money(ours or someone elses including using other people’s body parts) to get treatment and hopefully a cure that will recover our health. Is this wrong? No, of course not. However, this exercise can be used for far more serious terminal disease-death. We all will eventually die, either from old age or an accident or a illness. There is no escape for anyone for we have heard the diagnosis of this uncurable disease. Some will rush out and try and find a physical remedy while others will turn to religions all to no avail. All this is what natural man does under these circumstances and that is understandable. We are all struck with the same illness because we are born with it. It is in our genes and we carry it with us where ever we go. It is called death. It cannot be denied for it is a scientific fact because it is observable and repeatable both in and out of the laboratory. It is reality. This is the bad news. There is also good news. And this good news if for anyone who looks, asks, seeks or knocks. John 3:16
WRONG re: 3:16 misapplied. but in any case, an addition to the "terminal disease". No one and no entity gave you tomorrow.
Response:
[...] John 3:16 rb For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten rb Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but rb have everlasting life. rb Of course you realize that inverse of this makes just as much rb sense: rb (1) For God so hated the world, (2) that he gave his only rb begotten Son, that whosoever did not believeth in him should rb perish and go to hell. rb True? No. The second portion can be logically changed to its inverse as you have done since it only deals with consequences of a stated action. Since you have inverted the action, you are entitled to reverse the consequence as well to keep it all synchronized. Part one, however, cannot be logically changed from ‘loved’ to ‘hated,’ since there is no basis in logic for doing so, since by leaving part two effectively identical, you have not changed the result and therefor have no reason to assume a change to part one should take place at all. Your reasoning is flawed in this case… // J Shoemaker —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 100,000 Newsgroups – 19 Different Servers! =—–
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [...] John 3:16 rb For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten rb Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but rb have everlasting life. rb Of course you realize that inverse of this makes just as much rb sense: rb (1) For God so hated the world, (2) that he gave his only rb begotten Son, that whosoever did not believeth in him should rb perish and go to hell. rb True? No. The second portion can be logically changed to its inverse as you have done since it only deals with consequences of a stated action. Since you have inverted the action, you are entitled to reverse the consequence as well to keep it all synchronized. Part one, however, cannot be logically changed from ‘loved’ to ‘hated,’ since there is no basis in logic for doing so, since by leaving part two effectively identical, you have not changed the result and therefor have no reason to assume a change to part one should take place at all. Your reasoning is flawed in this case… // J Shoemaker
This only shows the the poster is the hater. And the subject is God.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our Terminal Disease When we become ill our first thought is what is causing this malady. We go to a doctor or clinic, get a check up and a diagnosis to try an uncover the cause. We reason that if there is a cause there might be a remedy to cure us. We will spend any amount of money(ours or someone elses including using other people’s body parts) to get treatment and hopefully a cure that will recover our health. Is this wrong? No, of course not. However, this exercise can be used for far more serious terminal disease-death. We all will eventually die, either from old age or an accident or a illness. There is no escape for anyone for we have heard the diagnosis of this uncurable disease. Some will rush out and try and find a physical remedy while others will turn to religions all to no avail. All this is what natural man does under these circumstances and that is understandable. We are all struck with the same illness because we are born with it. It is in our genes and we carry it with us where ever we go. It is called death. It cannot be denied for it is a scientific fact because it is observable and repeatable both in and out of the laboratory. It is reality. This is the bad news. There is also good news. And this good news if for anyone who looks, asks, seeks or knocks. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. All God could do to show his love is not relieve suffering and injustice but to *create* a *single* son (no big feat considering we are all his children) then sentence his son to death to appease himself so that he could forgive his beloved children for using their free will. This is what you call good news? I call it phcycosis. Steve Zodiac
Perhaps it comes under the heading IGNORANCE?
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our Terminal Disease When we become ill our first thought is what is causing this malady. We go to a doctor or clinic, get a check up and a diagnosis to try an uncover the cause. We reason that if there is a cause there might be a remedy to cure us. We will spend any amount of money(ours or someone elses including using other people’s body parts) to get treatment and hopefully a cure that will recover our health. Is this wrong? No, of course not. However, this exercise can be used for far more serious terminal disease-death. We all will eventually die, either from old age or an accident or a illness. There is no escape for anyone for we have heard the diagnosis of this uncurable disease. Some will rush out and try and find a physical remedy while others will turn to religions all to no avail. All this is what natural man does under these circumstances and that is understandable. We are all struck with the same illness because we are born with it. It is in our genes and we carry it with us where ever we go. It is called death. It cannot be denied for it is a scientific fact because it is observable and repeatable both in and out of the laboratory. It is reality. This is the bad news. There is also good news. And this good news if for anyone who looks, asks, seeks or knocks. John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Of course you realize that inverse of this makes just as much sense: For God so hated the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever did not believeth in him should perish and go to hell. True?
Response:
If you had not been brainwashed with religious doctrine you might search for truth concerning God and the matters of God. You people amaze me with your stupidity and ignorance, and the lack of willingness to learn the truth.
You don’t know how happy that makes me feel. God is spirit and everything mankind receives from God is spirit. Mankind has created all of his ills, social, physical and spiritual by rejecting God and the principles of God.
Imagine a god blaming his creation for the faults of his own making. Can you say psychosis? An idiots like you continue to blame God for the pain and sorrow among mankind.
Sure thing, why should god take any blame for that which he spews forth. You fool, every person who is born of God is a giver of love and good will exactly as God is. All people not of God are not giving love and good will and create the pain and sorrow in fellow mankind.
What a bigoted statement. Many so called godless people are a better example of love and good will then many Christians. Try to find an athiest in a prison. The "Son" of God is in truth and reality, the creation of "man" kind in the image of God. Any and all person who are this same creation of God in mind and spirit are this same Son.
assertions assertions Do yourself a favor; convince yourself truth is a very valuable asset to the mind and look for it.
Whatever truth you are operating under, I don’t want it. Steve Zodiac
Response:
If you had not been brainwashed with religious doctrine you might search for truth concerning God and the matters of God. You people amaze me with your stupidity and ignorance, and the lack of willingness to learn the truth. God is spirit and everything mankind receives from God is spirit. Mankind has created all of his ills, social, physical and spiritual by rejecting God and the principles of God. An idiots like you continue to blame God for the pain and sorrow among mankind. You fool, every person who is born of God is a giver of love and good will exactly as God is. All people not of God are not giving love and good will and create the pain and sorrow in fellow mankind. The "Son" of God is in truth and reality, the creation of "man" kind in the image of God. Any and all person who are this same creation of God in mind and spirit are this same Son. Do yourself a favor; convince yourself truth is a very valuable asset to the mind and look for it. DW Suiter Son of God
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our Terminal Disease When we become ill our first thought is what is causing this malady. We go to a doctor or clinic, get a check up and a diagnosis to try an uncover the cause. We reason that if there is a cause there might be a remedy to cure us. We will spend any amount of money(ours or someone elses including using other people’s body parts) to get treatment and hopefully a cure that will recover our health. Is this wrong? No, of course not. However, this exercise can be used for far more serious terminal disease-death. We all will eventually die, either from old age or an accident or a illness. There is no escape for anyone for we have heard the diagnosis of this uncurable disease. Some will rush out and try and find a physical remedy while others will turn to religions all to no avail. All this is what natural man does under these circumstances and that is understandable. We are all struck with the same illness because we are born with it. It is in our genes and we carry it with us where ever we go. It is called death. It cannot be denied for it is a scientific fact because it is observable and repeatable both in and out of the laboratory. It is reality. This is the bad news. There is also good news. And this good news if for anyone who looks, asks, seeks or knocks. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. All God could do to show his love is not relieve suffering and injustice but to *create* a *single* son (no big feat considering we are all his children) then sentence his son to death to appease himself so that he could forgive his beloved children for using their free will. This is what you call good news? I call it phcycosis. Steve Zodiac
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our Terminal Disease When we become ill our first thought is what is causing this malady. We go to a doctor or clinic, get a check up and a diagnosis to try an uncover the cause. We reason that if there is a cause there might be a remedy to cure us. We will spend any amount of money(ours or someone elses including using other people’s body parts) to get treatment and hopefully a cure that will recover our health. Is this wrong? No, of course not. However, this exercise can be used for far more serious terminal disease-death. We all will eventually die, either from old age or an accident or a illness. There is no escape for anyone for we have heard the diagnosis of this uncurable disease. Some will rush out and try and find a physical remedy while others will turn to religions all to no avail. All this is what natural man does under these circumstances and that is understandable. We are all struck with the same illness because we are born with it. It is in our genes and we carry it with us where ever we go. It is called death. It cannot be denied for it is a scientific fact because it is observable and repeatable both in and out of the laboratory. It is reality. This is the bad news. There is also good news. And this good news if for anyone who looks, asks, seeks or knocks. John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. All God could do to show his love is not relieve suffering and injustice but to *create* a *single* son (no big feat considering we are all his children) then sentence his son to death to appease himself so that he could forgive his beloved children for using their free will. This is what you call good news? I call it phcycosis. Steve Zodiac
Response:
Our Terminal Disease When we become ill our first thought is what is causing this malady. We go to a doctor or clinic, get a check up and a diagnosis to try an uncover the cause. We reason that if there is a cause there might be a remedy to cure us. We will spend any amount of money(ours or someone elses including using other people’s body parts) to get treatment and hopefully a cure that will recover our health. Is this wrong? No, of course not. However, this exercise can be used for far more serious terminal disease-death. We all will eventually die, either from old age or an accident or a illness. There is no escape for anyone for we have heard the diagnosis of this uncurable disease. Some will rush out and try and find a physical remedy while others will turn to religions all to no avail. All this is what natural man does under these circumstances and that is understandable. We are all struck with the same illness because we are born with it. It is in our genes and we carry it with us where ever we go. It is called death. It cannot be denied for it is a scientific fact because it is observable and repeatable both in and out of the laboratory. It is reality. This is the bad news. There is also good news. And this good news if for anyone who looks, asks, seeks or knocks. John 3:16
no comment untill now