When Will The End-Times Be And How Will We Know?

I ASKED you: What does it MEAN to believe? Is it necessary to parrot Lord! Lord! or do you have to DO what He wanted? It doesn't say that He is the ONLY conduit. It says that He came to be A conduit. On the contrary, that's EXACTLY how Jesus said it works in Matthew 25.

So why is there no evidence of a "changed life"? Why is it that prisons are full of believers? I'm not asking you to blather the same old same old bumper-sticker slogans. I'm asking you to THINK. Actually compose a sentence of your own for once. I haven't said that. YOU said that. YOU claim that Jesus never said it. YOU claim it isn't practical, even though the Roman church apparently did it. I didn't say anything about "communion" with God. That's a silly idea.I'm just pointing out what the gospel of John actually SAYS. But you never do argue. You just assert. Is that because there is no actual argument? He says that no man comes to the Father but by "the way".What is the way? He was explicit about that. "What must I do to be saved?" "Sell what you have and give to the poor." The Roman church apparently did that.He was also expliicit about how "all nations" will be judged - by what we do for the least of His brethern. You're making that up. Matthew 25 says nothing of the kind. They did the right thing BEFORE they ever even heard about Jesus - so Jesus CAN NOT have been a conduit for them. Again, Matthew 25 says nothing of the kind. It's all lies made up by apologists to fit their made-up scenario.

You didn't answer the question. Why is there no evidence of the supposed "changed lives". And you never have any counter to that point. See above. Why are the people who think the messenger is important not better people than the ones who don't. Socialism is no more athesitic than science is.Socialism is good because we are a social species. We do better when we help each other. You're supposed to have learned that in kindergarten. What more is there? See above. You're NOT changed. You're NOT transformed. You NEED to change to become MORE socialist, not less. Your messenger-worship is a millstone that's holding you back. You've been told many times. Isn't it silly for you to have communion with a bacterium? I will get on your case. You're not even really agreeing with them. You're just parroting them. If you had put any thought into it, you'd be able to discuss their arguments but you never do. Because they're wrong. Yes. Why can't you make an argument against that position instead of just scoffing at it? If there is an argument, MAKE IT. So tell us what you see. Because they're lying. See Genesis 3. That's s lie that the apologists have told you. Unless you have an argument to back up what they say, you have no business believing them.

This is a privately-owned website. Freedom of speech doesn't apply here. I'm not an ideologue, nor do I know of anybody who is a "secular humanist ideologue". Ideologies are for lazy thinkers.On the other hand, many believers are ideologues. The rules of the site prohibit preaching. I, for one, wish you would answer your posts thoughtfully instead of just parroting your ideology. I don't know of anybody who thinks that. Rational thinking can only be harmed if you teach children to think ideologically instead of rationally. Feel free to demonstrate some rational thinking.

So why don't you do that?

Better look up what tangible means. Might as well look up inaudible, tasteless and odorless while you're at it. All of the senses can be tested.

Comment: Your theology just gets stupider and stupider.

But that would be false.And it isn't rude to call an idea stupid. The god you market is so obviously made up, you spit on the Bible, you worship apologists without a moment of thought about what they're saying.... AND you're afraid to defend anything you say. "Stupid" is one of the politest things I can think of to say about your theology.

Stop lying. I have told you many times that I have experienced what you have. 1. Why is "free will" so all-fired important to you?2. How the hell is bowing to authority "free will"? The snake told the truth.You can not escape that by throwing out the book. If you believe in the snake, you have to accept what the book says about him. How many times do I have to point out that there is no transformation? You're preaching an ugly, disgusting, evil, exclusive lie. You should be ashamed of connecting your lies to Jesus.

And you can not claim that somebody else has not experienced what you have experienced. By it seems to be the entire premise of your theology. In Message 392 you said, "I would argue that the only way that humans could ever truly have free will is through being offered a choice between Gods authority and the lie of autonomy provided by the sneaky snake." So forget free will. Explain your theology without any mention of free will. That doesn't answer the question. It doesn't even have anything to do with the question.It isn't about God at all. It's about you. How can unconditional obedience involve free will? So take it or leave it. That isn't free will. Then it isn't free will. In fact, in your scenario, God has to actively prevent me from succeeding. You're rejecting the truth and embracing a lie. That is not good theology.I think at some level you know it's a lie, otherwise you wouldn't be so afraid of discussing it. I didn't say a word about what Romans claims. I said there IS no transformation. I can see that in your life. If Romans claims there is a magical transformation, Romans is wrong. Of course not. I point out what the book says. Much of what it says is not true but it still says what it says. He certainly was, as the Bible clearly shows - and you're afraid to discuss that too.

That doesn't answer the question. They might have been obedient slaves or they might have been discontented slaves who were afraid of the consequences of rebellion. There is no reason to think they had "free will" or to think they used it if they had it.

If they walk like a slave and talk like a slave....Show YOUR logic.

Again, why not? Why would He need to create rebels? But you need to explain the ones who "chose" slavery, not just the ones who chose freedom. I don't think it's plausible at all. How many people would choose slavery if it was actually a choice. That is the argument that slavers used to use ("Slavery is fun! They like it!) but it doesn't fly very high in the face of reality. Why? By that logic, they also know too much and have seen too much to be Christians. Christianity, especially your right-wing-nutty cult, is very much a minority.But practically every religion DOES believe in doing our best for each other, so clearly your assessment of "plausibility" is way off.

See the story of the prodigal son. He was disobedient but his father didn't kick him out of heaven. He welcomed him home. Doesn't that sound inclusive to you?Sorry, try again. By definition, yes. That's not a lie.

I mentioned the prodigal son to show that you're wrong about God treating the angels as sons.