Why I am creationist

Faor a minute there I thought you had become Riverrat.

That's funny, because I had the exact same thought when I first saw his post there.

---

The Laminator
We are the bog. Resistance is voltage over current. For goodness's sake, please vote Democrat this November!

What challenge? If I say, even I could wipe the floor with you, IF the spirit came upon me, do not I suggest that "I = nothing"?If you had understood what I meant, you would see what I am saying. There is another thread for the serpent versus God. Yet compare the serpent to satan, speaking charming things to Christ, and offering Kingdoms. The similarities are enough. Now do you understand that of the world and that of God? What did I warn you of? Did not I say; "These classes are to give you a list of information"?Now concerning there being only God, and concerning I am, I shall provide two quotes for both of your comments, and will you understand? From the time that it was, there am I; and now the Lord GOD, and his spirit hath sent me.I am the LORD, and there is noone else, there is no God beside meStop insisting that the serpent spoke good things, I have already said that sin is not progress. Did not the law of sin and death and warring follow? Even you said it did!This is not wisdom you speak, save that of the world, - it is a foolish people, that thinks they can become God, there is noone else beside him, he alone stretched out the heavens. If God made it in the beginning good then why would he intend evil? Is it good now? Even you admitt that there was warring concerning the law of sin and death. And so - has the serpent prospered us? Is not our flesh dead to sin? Can you understand what I am even saying? There is only one that is good - God, says Jesus Christ.Since there are about ten different threads for each of your ideas, I cannot possibly satisfy you. God makes peace and creates evil, if you have read the bible, you can tell me why?As for no devil (yet another topic here), I guess you have read no New Testament then? Have you read Job in the OT? I guess not.So you can choose to think that those who provide you with information are correct, and christians are wrong. But that's what you think, it's your opinion that your teacher blows christian ideas away, but you even say that the God of the bible is immature and dangerous etc. Yet we, like those who wrote it - believe in him, - so how correct can you be? Even in Isaiah it says it's blasphemy when that man said "who is the Lord that he can etc..." - and even, therefore, the very Jews who wrote the bible, would - I DOUBT, say you have the meaning thereof, if you accuse their God like you have.I have no further time for your quote mining, designed to make God look bad.Do you believe in Christ? Or any bible? You say things against christian? What exactly is your belief then? Are you a muslim?This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 09-16-2004 12:35 PM

Mr Hambre, in my deleted post, I admitted Rei's intelligence, and how good her post was, even a post of the month, if I have time, but I deleted it.Nevertheless, this is a misunderstanding. I meant nothing snide and I am surprised by your comments, atleast tell me what part you meant.

i'm challenging your spirit-filled wisdom. yes, i'm pretty sure i had participated in it. i didn't mean to take this off-track, but it was a reason. i have. hasatan is an angel of the Lord, whose duty is to test man. it is hasatan that orders the numbering of the tribes of israel, and hasatan who tests the faith of job. however, the serpent is not hasatan, he is an animal. there is nothing in the text to suggest otherwise, even if you do consider the tree to be a test, which it does not appear to be. god created the world. are you calling god's creation wicked, and therefor implying that god is evil? god is not, according to christianity, a diety removed from everyday life. i don't get your point. i gave you a proper contextual reading of the text, using knowledge of hebrew and mystic traditions. it's still not being used as a proper name. god has a proper name, and it is yhwh, probably plus some vowels. the original pronounciation has been lost. moreover, it seems like god made that name up for moses, and had some other, original name that no one remembers. but that depends on your reading."i am" is not the name of god. the name of the lord comes from the verb "to be" and could losely mean "that which exists"as for their being only one god, the evidence in the torah points otherwise, as well as some later writings. first, we have the word eloyhim, which is plural and means "gods." i'll let you go on this one, because curiously, the verbs used withit are all singular.however, there's another phrase, ben-eloyhim, which as i said before, means "sons of god" or "family of god" or even "other gods." other gods are mentioned in genesis 6, as having sex with the daughters of men and creating nephilim.consider also this verse:

quote:

---

Deu 32:7 Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations: ask thy father, and he will shew thee; thy elders, and they will tell thee.
Deu 32:8 When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.
Deu 32:9 For the LORD'S portion [is] his people; Jacob [is] the lot of his inheritance.

---

this is a part where which bible you own makes a difference. the masoretic text seems to get favored here. but the verse makes no sense this way. when god was dividing the world, seperating the sons of adam, he determined the number of countries by how many israelites there were? there were no israelites then, because israel hadn't been born. abraham hadn't been born. just adam, and his sons.the sepuigant and the version found at qumran say something else. instead of ben-yisrael it says ben-eloyhim. the sons, or family of god. one god, or angel, or whatever, to each nation, but israel belongs to yhwh. makes more sense, right? some nervous masorete changed it because it was too overly polytheistic for him.indeed, anytime it says "the lord god" in your english bible, it's using the proper name of god alongside the title of god to tell you WHICH ONE. where did the serpent lie? show me his lie. god said they'd die the same day they ate the fruit. the serpent said they'd live, and their eyes would be opened and they'd be like god. who was right, according to the text? did they die that same day? yes, as commanded by god. are we reading different books here? because choice and faith are important. personally, i believe that the process is designed to institute growth towards to diety status. i've read both. the new testament is flawed, containing greek ideals of diametrically opposed good and evil. and, if you're going to be upity about only one god, then technically, suggesting something in opposition to god is blasphemy. according the jewish tradition of course.instead, as shown in job, we have a temptor, hasatan (a son of god), who is OUR opponent, not god's. he serves the will of god. have you read job? well, where are your refutations then? i said the bible said something, and proved it. where is your proof? so far you've quoted out of context, and NEVER with any form of citation. it is not my opinion that teacher easily refutes any point christians make -- he does. with the bible. that's what i'm trying to point out to you. you have a view of the god of the bible that is incorrect. the bible says otherwise, whether or not you believe in it, or think it's accurate. you said the god of the bible, and i'm telling you about the god of the bible. if you can't accept that god killed thousands of innocent children in a single night in egypt, just to make a good story for passover dinner, you do not believe in the god of the bible. you believe in something else.and no one group of jews wrote the bible. the opinion and beliefs about god changes just within the torah. within the other books, there are many different pictures painted of god. and the god of christianity is very different from the god of judaism, even though it's the same god. twice i told you to read an entire chapter. how is that quote mining? i did not take them out of context. i have read the rest of the text surrounding them. feel free to point out where the local context contradicts what i wrote. i'm not making god look bad, i'm saying that the BIBLE does to people with certain modern value.i'm ok with you believing in that god, and worshipping him. i do. you, however, don't seem to be too fond of the idea, thus demonstrating my point. people react badly to the archaic portrayal of god. yes. i also believe him to be the son of god, a very wise teacher, a messiah, and that he gave his life for us. yes and no. i take the bible with a grain of salt, as far as belief goes. i know it's history, and about different version and translations. i'm interested in what the bible says very literally, and what it means idiomatically. i'm interested in the context, and what the authors meant, not what people have said about it.do i believe it to be historically accurate, or even theologically correct in all areas? no. i am a christian, a follower of christ. i have said nothing against god that bible itself does not say. if you think those actions are bad, you're applying your morality to god. in reality, it's the other way around, god defines good and evil. it is not blasphemy to describe god's actions as told by the bible. if you think i'm saying god is evil, that's your problem.arguments i make against christianity are valid. christians today do not follow the original traditions of jesus of narazeth, they follow the traditions of paul of tarsus. paul often contradicted teachings of jesus, and can easily be shown to be a person not worthy of following. i do not believe paul to be inspired.simple test: who did jesus was the foundation of the church? he left someone in charge, who was it? no. and i have nothing against islam, as i have never adequately studied it. i read a bit on mormonism, however, and decided not to go with that.

haha. i still say the ptolemaic system adequately predicts the motion of the planets. no need for a newer revision!

Your rants are lengthy, but I must wonder what you're trying to establish. I did read Job, and infact satan was doing what he had always done, he was walking to and fro in the earth, and now he seeked to do evil to Job. It's been a while but; was it Peter? Something about him being the rock on which he will build his church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I said "stop insisting that the serpent spoke good things". I didn't say the serpent lied, but nice try at a strawman. --> Nevertheless, the serpent did lie, so well done in getting me to say it, because he made it sound good what he was offering, like satan did to Christ. God didn't withold anything that should not have been withheld, man's future because of the serpent, is now grim on earth. Our bodies die, because we don't receive the tree of life, but everlasting life God now gives. So, despite being as gods on the earth, despite doing that which we should not do GOD still gives us everlasting life and dies on the cross. Is he the bad guy? The prince of this world is satan. Are you sure that you read the NT?The enemy is satan, the enemy offered Christ the kingdoms of the world. Why?Why argue with me though? What caused these banterisms against me? Who is your teacher? Is he of the world?

no, he was testing the faith of job. he had a bet with god that he could crack job. he failed. good job! now, where are peter's letters, and where did this paul guy come from? why is he the foundation of christianity paul, and not peter as jesus said?these aren't leading questions: i don't know the answers. god withheld knowledge, for fear of man overthrowing him. the reason god tosses them out of the garden of eden is because he doesn't want them to become immortal, and be gods. for the next few chapters, god is constantly worried about man growing up too fast, and becoming competition. see genesis 11. and you accuse me of strawmen! i never said god was the bad guy. i said that unbelievers reading the bible have a tendancy to think that, because of what the bible says. excluding the letters of paul, yes. as i covered before, i don't like paul. and, as i said, that is a misunderstanding of the role of hasatan, the adversary. but more importantly, if satan is evil and rules the world, why is that and where is god? wouldn't a good god put a stop to that? your logic has some contradictions in it. satan didn't have the kingdoms of the earth to offer. it was a bait-and-switch deal. as i pointed out, deuteronomy says that each nation has a patron angel, or god, or divine being. satan does not rule them all, he watches over one of them. according to the bible, anyways. you called me a blasphemer for quoting the bible. i was only trying to explain why unbelievers don't like the god talked about in the bible. as a former unbeliever myself. my teacher is jewish, one of god's chosen people. he is a professor of religion. as for of the world, you're making a funny distinction. everyone is of the world, unless they come from another planet. christians do not exist in another plane of existance; they exist in the world. the idea of christianity is to do the best for the world: love one another, and spread hope, compassion, and charity into the world. that's what jesus did.or, am i reading a different book again?

Okay - I apologize for saying you are a blasphemer(I'm not an evil person - just an evil poster ), but please apreciate what it looked like when You said; Can you apreciate what it looked like? Or do you think the God of the bible is not God? You have to remember, that I believe in God - spoken of in the bible, as GOD, and that these words appear to be against him. I am not ready to say "this God etc.." incase the bible is wrong in places, and it was actually man that is evil and causes wars etc..
I am one who is not prepared to hear any evil spoken concerning God. There is a possibility that man wrote much and God inspired little. Or that the bible isn't entirely accurate through oral tradition, and faulty human memory. Yet I believe that God is as Christ spoke of him, and that's who he is. I might possibly fault bible but not God of the bible. I still believe in bibleGod, and IF there be fault - it's likely it's all down to man. The world says that God is the bad guy. But God's intentions were always good. This can be seen by God incarnate. He that had no sin was made sin for us. But my teacher is Christ, who is not of the world. Are you saying he is a liar like the serpent then? I agree.

Over hereIt's always been interesting to me because the Gospel of Peter was probably compiled about the same time as Paul's epistles. That's to be expected since they were two of the major driving forces of the early church. In fact, Thomas, Peter, James, Mary and Paul could be said to be THE Founders of Christianity. Yet the writings of Peter, Thomas, James and Mary all seemed to get purged when the Roman Church became ascendant with the rise in power of the church under Emperor Constantine.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

well, yes. that was my point exactly. the question is, can YOU appreciate what it looks like? these are not stories i made up to slander god -- they're in the bible. i believe the bible to be written by the hand of man, about god. i believe that it is not neccessarily correct or accurate in its portrayal. i've heard thought that bible was really a document written favor of something other than god (some other god or devil perhaps?). re-reading it with this in mind, it does seem to say some nasty things about god. well yes, they do make a case against him. that was my point. but they're not my words. take issue with the bible.of course, i don't really care. i believe god to be both good and evil. i don't believe in him because i think he's nice and friendly, i believe him in because i think he's real. i was just speaking of the god talked about in the first six books of the bible, the torah and the book of joshua. it says these things of god. in the text, the plundering, conquering, and division of canaan is a holy war, commanded by god himself, and fought by one of his angels leading the israelites.i do think the bible is wrong in lots of places. and i think alot of it is made up to justify concerns more modern than the text claims to be, such as passages on the promised land. read the bible, think about it. but i was not saying god was evil. i say why people would think that. god can't be evil, nor can he be good. he's above both. it's a little more than a possibility. study the history of the text for a while. you'll find that it's more like 95% probability. agreed. first of all, jesus was not god. read the bits of the bible concerning gethsemane. he pleads with god. he can't be god himself. that's innaccurate, unless you're a gnostic. if christ had a body, he was of the world. christ participated in the world, and consorted with people of ill-repute. this got him into trouble with the church elders, remember? satan is, yes. but you still haven't shown me the serpent's lie. he said their eyes would be open, and they'd be like god. god confirms this happened. the serpent said they wouldn't die that same day, like god said. they didn't die. the serpent told the truth.personally, i believe god was being protective. but the serpent told no lie. that's why he was so "subtle"

ah yes, i knew we had at least one such document from the peter branch of christianity, which didn't succeed so well against pauline christianity.but the question is what caused this to happen, and why is paul remembered when peter is not?

I don't think God is evil. Do you dismiss what Christ said,--> only one is good - God, ?As for Christ not being of this world. If his Kingdom was of this world, wouldn't he have fought for it?In the beginning was the Word,.....the Word became flesh. The Word was with God, the Word was God.This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 09-16-2004 06:57 PM

I think it is more interesting than just Peter.Why were the other major creators of Christianity purged?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Mar 10:18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God

---

is jesus evil? he just said he wasn't good. and he never said that god wasn't evil as well as good. the good here probably means more "honorable" than "the opposite of evil" but that depends on how you read your greek. that's the exact reason the jews don't recognize him as a messiah. but who says he didn't? afterall, what's left of rome now? the roman church, in jesus's name. technically, he conquered an empire. and while we're on the topic of blasphemy, the christ of the book of john is a blasphemer. no human, corporeal being may claim to be god. even if jesus is a son of god, it's still blasphemy. even if he's the ONLY begotten son of god, it's still blasphemy. and the text clearly presents a separation of jesus and god.john starts by re-writing genesis. also a no-no. genesis never mentions a "word" but later traditions (around the time of christ) mention a different name of god: "memra" which means "to speak" or "the word." but this is only one aramaic translation, and not exactly proof of anything. genesis says nothing. the only thing even close to a word of god is "the angel of the lord" who speaks for god. he has a proper name, but i can never remember it. some say that everytime god speaks in the bible, it's really this angel speaking for him. but i doubt that, i think god speaks for himself. the word of god (to man) is the covenant with moses, kept in the ark.