ForumGarden

Ahso!;1511588 wrote: What do you get from it?


Aside from a good laugh and daily comedy obviously..

Ahso!;1511588 wrote: And why do you prefer that? What do you get from it?


Other than the opportunity to try and understand the mindset since I have to deal with people like them in real life all the time,

Entertainment.

LarsMac;1511590 wrote: Other than the opportunity to try and understand the mindset since I have to deal with people like them in real life all the time


Good point.

LarsMac;1511590 wrote: Other than the opportunity to try and understand the mindset since I have to deal with people like them in real life all the time,

Entertainment.


Can't get enough delusion? That's interesting.

You know how responsible parents caution their kids with reason - you are who you hang with. bs in - bs out.

Ahso!;1511605 wrote: Can't get enough delusion? That's interesting.

You know how responsible parents caution their kids with reason - you are who you hang with. bs in - bs out.


Sometimes, you are just stuck with some people due to circumstances. It helps to know where they are coming from.

LarsMac;1511617 wrote: Sometimes, you are just stuck with some people due to circumstances. It helps to know where they are coming from.Priceless!

Saint_;1511578 wrote: Actually, Pahu really believes everything he says.They all do in that regard. They all are dedicated delusional christians who think their clever manipulations are revelations from their invisible friend whispering in their ear.

The difference with Pahu is that he's doing it methodically with bs websites that I've witnessed updated to make changes immediately after being completely humiliated on other forums.

Pahu's Evolution thread is genuine bs and he knows it. He's just using it for indexing purposes.

Ahso!;1511622 wrote: They all do in that regard. They all are dedicated delusional christians who think their clever manipulations are revelations from their invisible friend whispering in their ear.

The difference with Pahu is that he's doing it methodically with bs websites that I've witnessed updated to make changes immediately after being completely humiliated on other forums.

Pahu's Evolution thread is genuine bs and he knows it. He's just using it for indexing purposes.


People who believe their own bs are the most interesting, I think. And that is not limited to Christians.

Ahso!;1511605 wrote: Can't get enough delusion? That's interesting.

You know how responsible parents caution their kids with reason - you are who you hang with. bs in - bs out.


This is interesting as well;

http://www./breitba50rt.com/national-se ... hree-years

Mickiel;1511627 wrote: This is interesting as well;

http://www./breitba50rt.com/national-se ... hree-years


I've little use for anything from Breitbart

LarsMac;1511635 wrote: I've little use for anything from Breitbart


Neither do I, but I like truth where ever it emerges.

I am not limited in my learning.

Mickiel;1511640 wrote: Neither do I, but I like truth where ever it emerges.

I am not limited in my learning.


I question the veracity of the "truth" that comes from unreliable sources.

LarsMac;1511641 wrote: I question the veracity of the "truth" that comes from unreliable sources.


Well so do I, yet I understand that truth is sprinkled everywhere, in many forms on this earth. I like it where ever I find it. I was banned today from a forum that only discusses what one man taught; I disagreed with that and they got rid of me.

It is how it is.

Mickiel we may not always agree but I've had the same experience of being banned for presenting an alternative truth. That is not like alternative news.LOL

Ted;1511668 wrote: Mickiel we may not always agree but I've had the same experience of being banned for presenting an alternative truth. That is not like alternative news.LOL




Right, its like a cold blooded thing to do to a person who is just sharing their point of view.

Peace

Mickiel I've ben damned, sworn at, belittled and others on sites. It has never been an atheist but almost always a so called fundamentalist Christian. Go figure. They need so badly to be right they put others down.

Ted;1511692 wrote: Mickiel I've ben damned, sworn at, belittled and others on sites. It has never been an atheist but almost always a so called fundamentalist Christian. Go figure. They need so badly to be right they put others down.




Same here; I believe if they could have found a stake, they would have burnt me at it.

Probably LOL

Ted;1511707 wrote: Probably LOL


The fear of what one can speak out on, can get you killed. White nationalist have shown this. Those jokers will kill you.

The are indeed a sick bunch. Neither do they know history.

Ted;1511828 wrote: The are indeed a sick bunch. Neither do they know history.




I agree, its as if they want history to disappear ; president Trump has this sickness. We are in serious trouble.

Yes absolutely.

Ted;1511856 wrote: Yes absolutely.




Some sites have a definite message that they are putting out, other sites have no joint message , they allow anyone who is not disruptive , to put out whatever message of reason, or simply their opinions on anything. Opinions on religion bring with them a reputation of disruption-- perhaps even a fear. Breitbart is one of those sites that bring with it a type of disruption. Disruption to some is a smear, to others its the beginning of knowledge. There is obviously a fear in a site that has no hardcore views, to be branded as having one that they don't agree with. And I understand that.

Atheism brings with it just as much disruption as Theism does. If you think not, then explain to me why.

Mickiel;1511872 wrote: Some sites have a definite message that they are putting out, other sites have no joint message , they allow anyone who is not disruptive , to put out whatever message of reason, or simply their opinions on anything. Opinions on religion bring with them a reputation of disruption-- perhaps even a fear. Breitbart is one of those sites that bring with it a type of disruption. Disruption to some is a smear, to others its the beginning of knowledge. There is obviously a fear in a site that has no hardcore views, to be branded as having one that they don't agree with. And I understand that.

Atheism brings with it just as much disruption as Theism does. If you think not, then explain to me why.


It is up to the one making a claim to produce evidence for that claim. .



You're the one making the claim you produce the evidence.

There is no physical evidence for the ineffable. The evidence is individuial and their experience.

gmc;1511882 wrote: It is up to the one making a claim to produce evidence for that claim. .



You're the one making the claim you produce the evidence.


No matter which side makes the claim first , they both are faced with the same dilemma, an opposition that will take you through a maze of nonsense, just to keep you from simple truths. Truths that cover both sides, but do both sides want that kind of unity? Can men exist without women?

Can Atheist exist without Theist?

Ted;1511888 wrote: There is no physical evidence for the ineffable. The evidence is individuial and their experience.


In which case it is not real for anyone else it does not exist for anyone else.



No matter which side makes the claim first , they both are faced with the same dilemma, an opposition that will take you through a maze of nonsense, just to keep you from simple truths. Truths that cover both sides, but do both sides want that kind of unity? Can men exist without women?

Can Atheist exist without Theist?


What utter nonsense. If you make a claim that something exists it is up to you to back up your claim.

An atheist is someone who does not believe there is sufficient proof to believe in god. It is up to you to prove his or her existence if that is your claim not for an atheist to prove he doesn't. I have never seen or heard anytghing to convince me thre is a god someone gibbering that they have had a spritual experience might make it rteal for them but n ot for anyone else.

Try and follow this example. eg. There are blue people living at the end of my street. It is up to me to back up that claim the fact that you cannot disprove their existence does not mean that they must therefore exist - get it?

Mickiel I most firmly believe in the reality of God. I think He/she/It is beyond existence. The spirit of God is very much present.

Ted;1511909 wrote: Mickiel I most firmly believe in the reality of God. I think He/she/It is beyond existence. The spirit of God is very much present.




Well belief in God is also self isolating, because God is self isolating at this time. So much of our thoughts about God are considered " Dark Thinking." It then falls to who will be willing to think deeply with you. But most won't, because they fear getting drowned in such pulsating and weighty knowledge.

I don't know how you can say that. God is beyond human language. We do not have the language with which to define or describe God.

Ted;1511922 wrote: I don't know how you can say that. God is beyond human language. We do not have the language with which to define or describe God.


Well your right, we certainly don't have the understanding to explain God; Job 36:26, " God is great, we know him not!" He is beyond what we have, so we are reduced to using what we have; which is at best like searching for the needle in the haystack. I mean its straining and confusing, but we can only do, what we can do. Really the moral of the story is still this; God is totally in control, and many humans just don't like that because we like being in control. So we mess up an already hardcore reality.

I think this is what God wanted, I mean he knows; he knows how weak and fragile we all are. He knows. And he does not make mistakes. We are born in sin and evil, we were pre pardoned from this before we were born, literally given eternal life, but it had to be played out like God wanted it to, and Jesus sacrifice was the climax to the play. A stunning way for God to expose us all to sin and evil, but he took care of this incredible opening of our weak understanding, but he allowed us to see the results of living in sin, but did not let sin affect our future with him; a stunning thing for him to do! I truly wish I understood it all.

The way God did this, we really do not need to understand him; this way we do not need to describe him, but Gal. 5:22-23 is the best description of God that I have ever read. In my view, my personal guess, these fruit of the Spirit are the ways and means of God!

Mickiel I do not believe that God controls every thing. I do not accept the concept of original sin t. That was a curse that Augustine foisted on us. If God is so in control how come millions are nearly starving to dealth around the world. He/She/It doesnt care! I do not accept that from the God who promotes justice and compassion.

Ted;1511971 wrote: Mickiel I do not believe that God controls every thing. I do not accept the concept of original sin t. That was a curse that Augustine foisted on us. If God is so in control how come millions are nearly starving to dealth around the world. He/She/It doesnt care! I do not accept that from the God who promotes justice and compassion.


They starve because its God's will. Listen, if something happens that God " Does not want to happen;" then by default that something would be more powerful than God! One must think deeper than we do. If God did NOT want the people to starve, but the people are starving, then whatever is causing them to starve, would then be more powerful than God. Can you see this?

No I cannot. It begs the question of what kind of God do you worship. One who willynilly decides that many need to suffer needlesly and die a horrible death. This is the God who is love? Thanks but I'll find another one thanks. That is a God of love t? We do not see that in Jesus of Nazareth. And This Jesus has become the norm of the Bible. This man, the word made flesh, trumps all written words. And yes he trumps the Bible which is a very human construction. With the kind of God you are proposing makes him into one who has a personality disorder.

Ted;1512069 wrote: No I cannot. It begs the question of what kind of God do you worship. One who willynilly decides that many need to suffer needlesly and die a horrible death. This is the God who is love? Thanks but I'll find another one thanks. That is a God of love t? We do not see that in Jesus of Nazareth. And This Jesus has become the norm of the Bible. This man, the word made flesh, trumps all written words. And yes he trumps the Bible which is a very human construction. With the kind of God you are proposing makes him into one who has a personality disorder.




What God you worship is up to you, and Jesus does not trump all words in the bible, God does. And God is going to kill millions more humans before he is done with the killing.

Mickiel and Jesus himself is reported to have said all authority in heaven and on earth is given to me. So yes Jesus trumps even the Bible.

Ted;1512107 wrote: Mickiel and Jesus himself is reported to have said all authority in heaven and on earth is given to me. So yes Jesus trumps even the Bible.




I have no authority , I speak only for myself. You have a lot more pull here than I do; I walk alone in my view.

Theologically Jesus being the Son of God and the one on whome all authority is given does trump the Bible.

Ted;1512158 wrote: Theologically Jesus being the Son of God and the one on whome all authority is given does trump the Bible.


It does in one sense, but really Jesus and the bible are the same, one is the written word, the other the living word.

I cannot go along with that. The historical Jesus or the pre-Easter Jesus was in fact a very profound humanbeing. The post-Easter Jesus is what Jesus became after the crucifixion. His spirit lived and lives on.

Ted;1512165 wrote: I cannot go along with that. The historical Jesus or the pre-Easter Jesus was in fact a very profound humanbeing. The post-Easter Jesus is what Jesus became after the crucifixion. His spirit lived and lives on.


The Historical Jesus , and the Post Easter Jesus are the same.

I do not believe so. The historical Jesus was murdered by the Romans. The post-Easter Jesus is what the historical jesus became after his death.

Ted;1512200 wrote: I do not believe so. The historical Jesus was murdered by the Romans. The post-Easter Jesus is what the historical jesus became after his death.


I hold no reasons to believe in a Easter Jesus; Easter is of no importance to me.

Mickiel;1512304 wrote: I hold no reasons to believe in a Easter Jesus; Easter is of no importance to me.


Yet I have nothing about Easter that my rejection of it would cause me to mistreat people. That is very Important to me. I had to learn that, desire to be that way, really see the harsh error in believing things that are different from others beliefs, but learning to still respect them.

Mickiel I have a book suggestiton for you "Speaking Christian" by Marcus Borg.

Ted;1515787 wrote: Mickiel I have a book suggestiton for you "Speaking Christian" by Marcus Borg.




I'll take a look at it, could you give me a short description of it?

Mickiel Marcus Borg and Dom Crossan are among the worlds top Jesus scholars and recognized as such. Unfortunately Marcus passed away 1.5 years ago. I've been fortunate enough to know and study under these men. In his book he looks at how many words today do not have the same meaning as they at when the Bible was being written. Meanings have changed over the centuries. For example the word "salvation" had a very different meanings in Biblical times. The meaning at the time was liberation. The Israelis after the Exodus was "God saved them. The same holds true for after the return from Babylon, God had saved them from bondage. There are but a few places in the NT where it meant entering an afterlife. For the most part it meant . The liberation from from bondage. Bondage today can mean several things such as alcoholism or drug addiction. Neither has anything to do with an afterlife. The idea of an afterlife was a later addition to Judaism. The atonement theology was not much used until 1097. So it too was a later addition to the Christian faith.

Ted;1515806 wrote: Mickiel Marcus Borg and Dom Crossan are among the worlds top Jesus scholars and recognized as such. Unfortunately Marcus passed away 1.5 years ago. I've been fortunate enough to know and study under these men. In his book he looks at how many words today do not have the same meaning as they at when the Bible was being written. Meanings have changed over the centuries. For example the word "salvation" had a very different meanings in Biblical times. The meaning at the time was liberation. The Israelis after the Exodus was "God saved them. The same holds true for after the return from Babylon, God had saved them from bondage. There are but a few places in the NT where it meant entering an afterlife. For the most part it meant . The liberation from from bondage. Bondage today can mean several things such as alcoholism or drug addiction. Neither has anything to do with an afterlife. The idea of an afterlife was a later addition to Judaism. The atonement theology was not much used until 1097. So it too was a later addition to the Christian faith.




Okay, I'll get the book because I am interested in those word changes. However, salvation can also mean being saved or set free from the bondage of sin and flesh; which is how the term can really be used to lead into an after life, or a life where no sin and flesh exist. Because that kind of freedom cannot exist in our world. So it has to mean an after life. The term can be used to support both what Marcus found, and support a meaning of new life. In fact, salvation has a greater meaning when used to support a new life free from sin. God saving us from that greater bondage.

Mickiel there are only a few cases in the NT where salvation refers to an afterlife. The rest are about liberation from bondage here on earth for many people. I do not accept the "original sin theory of Augustine. "God saw all that he had created and found it to be very good". That is original blessing. Atonement theology is for many scholars a non starter. It is a human concept. I also hear in the forum that nothing cannot come out of nothing. That is contrary to quantum theory. Atoms apparently wink in and out of existence on a regular basis.

Easter has nothing to do with Jesus in the first place. It is the feast of Oesther - Pagan Goddess of New Life. In the same way that Christmas is actually the feast of Yule - the Winter Solstice. Both of them Pagan festivals hijacked by the Romans.