A Working Definition of God

"For God is love". How long and convoluted is that? To know God, who he is, not "it", we look to Jesus Christ. He is everything God is. He is everything God wanted for us.If you want to know what God "is" then look upon Christ's actions completely without.Watch a film or something, (an accurate one), and pretend you've never been preached at by a Christian, and pretend that the message is for you alone. What do you think about what God is? Was he violent, was his intentions good or bad (looking simply at his words and actions objectively with no preconceived notions or ideas whatsoever). I challenge you! Watch the passion.This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 04-18-2005 07:33 PM

Dan, I've tried to plainly answer your question. I believe this following excerpt answers your every whim. You see, I see your problem, if no one has seen God, they might ask "what is he/it". So it's not that Dushku is God, but that the feeling you have may well be considered God to some extent, in that "love comes from God".Now treat everybody as you would her, and then you'll see God.This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-19-2005 07:09 AM

No, you've missed it here Dan. Missed it. You're talking about pleasure/lust and things that make Dan feel good.I'm talking about fire. You're talking about self-gratification.How much would you desire a Sutherland movie? Would you give your life to see it? There's no such thing. Not if you're speaking sexually. If someone wants to save your asshole for your asshole's sake then maybe.The bible speaks of three criteria only, "agape" love, the love of God (giving your life for your friends etc). love for family or a wife and love as friendship. (my memory might be a bit off, but I think those are the three mentioned. More explanation here.
Love of asshole? Me thinks lust of asshole maybe, me thinks self-gratification, maybe. Me thinks love? Me thinks not.clarification courtesy of PBThis message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-19-2005 10:32 AM

I perceive that you have compassion, and Dan has pleasure, but neither of you have the love of God in you. I posted incase you did. You are the natural man Dan, (Romans). The natural man thinks the Spiritual things are foolishness.Now read the bible passage again. For it says those without it are without God. Is that not true? Are you not both without it?It's not pleasure, it's not sentimental, it's not comprehended by you. It's not in you. It could be.It is the fire that burns stronger than the fire for your own baba. It is the fire in me, that loves your baba more than you do. Can you locate it? Can you understand? How can you understand?

But we're talking about what God is remember, all I'm saying is what he isn't, in an effort to help you understand this. I thought I also made it clear what he is, and JC certainly shows this.I'm sure those things make you feel good, as they do everyone, but you've confused yourself if you think all of them spiritual. Maybe a doctrine of men, from a religion - has confused you as to what things are spiritual and natural?

Remember that book in the bible I quoted? Here's from the same book; Since you boast of worldy things, I know that you speak of natural things and not spiritual, because you speak from the viewpoint of the world.I don't mean to be condescending, I just know that the Spirit must be tested. Any Spirit that concedes that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of true Spirit. Do yur sources concede this?This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-19-2005 11:00 AM

I am not good, don't call me good. But God is good, which means I must give Dan a tough time so that he may come to know truth, even if it is to my own name sake, that I am altogether evil in the site of all men/women here at this forum, that my name is utterly dirty. Then I am evil! So be it, amen.,"Only one is good, that being God" - Jesus Christ.

And just exactly WHAT are you talking about? Keep going, I want you to exalt yourself. Claim that you're better than me in every way if you want, so that the scripture comes true.

Don't waste your time. Mike's fundamental dogma is elementary principles of naturalism. He only accepts evidence if it fits his premise of naturalism. If it doesn't, it doesn't exist in his world.

Well. you've been a member longer than I, but these guys are for science and seem to worship it as their naturalistic god of the elements. They seem to not be able to see past it so much that it dominates their time. The wool is over their eyes so much that they think science means that God doesn't exist anymore unless they have tangeable evidence. Backwards, just as the enemy wants it. It's the big authority of their time, and they obey it, and stay in the land of boxed thought.

No Mike, you have it backwards because the ruler of this world is God's enemy, so all you'll ever know is how the world works, because you are of the world.God says everything(universe) evidences God. (the truth)You say that God must evidence that he made the universe, (a backward perversion of truth, and a sin against God).So I know EXACTLY what you people consider evidence. Soft dino tissue evidences that it survives millions of years, instead of being a falsification of MOY like it really is, which is apparently, logically - more important than a confirmation in science, yet you say "the dino is simply old according to my naturalistic - cell to critter philosophy." Shouldn't your law say that this falsification is much more important than confirmations like so called transitionals?God says not to murder, and certainly not harm any little ones.the enemy makes it legal to murder, especially little ones.B A C K W A R D

[qs]The psalmist talks of his vengeance and strife. But God strictly says to not even be cruel to a little one (when God speaks), and to not even get angry with your brother or you are in danger of the commandment "do no murder". GOD says this in the flesh. Stop trying to pick out an odd OT psalmist's song when those scriptures are too old to be understood according to this age/society, and are relative to the woes of the person.You know I meant what God says, and not the psalmist's woes.Now also we have the commandment to "do no murder" which is surely what God says!Nothing will cause me to judge God, like you are trying to get me to do. If men do murder - then I trust them not because of the commandments of Christ, but if God does anything himself through supernatural means or literally, then I question him not.Here's the increase for my cause;The Lord says worship him, and have no idols.The world worships the rich and famous. (a perversion and sin against God, who is the only one who should be worshipped)and the vanity of man increases.Here's the increase for my cause;God says don't have idolatry.The world makes God in their own image, and says he should "evidence" himself, and he "should do this, that, and the other" according to how the world thinks God should be.(a perversion, and transgression against the second commandment, and making your own version of what God should be).This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 04-19-2005 02:01 PM

Okay.......I got that one. I admitt, I laughed, you got my inner-goon. ...*wiz* *pop* *smokes* Do you think I'm some kind of computerized refutation matrix?That's probably your best one-liner yet IMHO.

But it won't be her that's believing she can't be wrong. She's believing the bible isn't wrong. That's arrogance! Because everything is evidence of God, which the bible said - well before science.Your problem is that you think science "owns" evidence and "owns" the universe. You have it wrong my friend God got to both first. Actually, there is mention of the Jews in Egypt. I think they found a place of Rameses aswell.But as the link says, what they've found OF Egypt is remnants. see linkHey, I'm off topic but it seems all your side wants to do is refute our God, so fair game. But it's Christians who wrote these definitions in the NT. Didn't you read 1 John 4?This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-21-2005 01:38 AM

No. It's what the bible says before science. Not a non sequitur. Your authority is science. My authority is God, the bible God - who has been known of since 4000 odd bc. The bible says that the nature of the Godhead is revealed in the creation. Like it or not, from my perspective, all your logic and science will not remove evidence of God which is apparent in creation. You can define "evidence" on your own terms, but that's just a forced conclusion, from a naturalistic methodo perspective. It would be different because it wouldn't exist.This was my argument from "an argument from design" - that the chance naturalism stance is circular, even by your beloeved logic.For chance to happen - you need a place for it to happen in. Thus you always will = no explanation.The first cause is God because chance doesn't produce anything without a place first. So it's not chance -> place. It's Place [necessity for] -> chance -> occurences. Percy, I know for a fact the Hebrews are mentioned by Egyptian artefact and that they have found the lost city. It was even on discovery channel. Your side just simply ignore evidence when it suits you.I mean, do you want me to believe that you would accept any biblical happenings as true? Pa-lease.