Originally posted by HandyAndyI'm tempted by the carefree world, although it depends am I allowed mathematical problems and is sex and are children ruled out? If so I'll put up with mortality and suffering.
Come on, folks, instead of quibbling over tree roots and microbes, here's a better question:
If mankind, here in the 21st century, were given another chance to choose between immortality in
a carefree world, or knowledge accompanied by pain and suffering, which option would we select?
I say the latter.. in a heartbeat. Long live Original Sin!
I'm left wondering what divegeester means by the "Revelation of Christ" though?
Originally posted by DeepThoughtHe means the Book of Revelation.
I'm tempted by the carefree world, although it depends am I allowed mathematical problems and is sex and are children ruled out? If so I'll put up with mortality and suffering.
I'm left wondering what divegeester means by the "Revelation of Christ" though?
In some Bibles, such as the King James, the book is called "The Revelation of Jesus Christ", while others, such as the New American Bible call it "The Revelation to John".
Originally posted by SuzianneAh, I did wonder I'd only known it as "the Revelation of St. John of Patmos" or simply "Revelation". I'll reread it to see what it says about the Tree of Life.
He means the Book of Revelation.
In some Bibles, such as the King James, the book is called "The Revelation of Jesus Christ", while others, such as the New American Bible call it "The Revelation to John".
Originally posted by HandyAndyPersonally, I think immortality would render life rather meaningless.
If mankind, here in the 21st century, were given another chance to choose between immortality in a carefree world, or knowledge accompanied by pain and suffering, which option would we select?
1 edit
-Removed-I've said I don't know if you are a Christian or not, and I have given reasons for why I don't know. So where is the lie? How is my not knowing if you are a Christian or not a lie... are you claiming I do know?
I gave an answer to your question about the tree of knowledge of good and evil on pg 5, and gave you an answer to your question about the tree of life on pg 6. You ignored those answers as well as other answers to questions you've posed here. I started out with you in this thread in good faith, but all I've seen you do here is argue with Christians in the same way I've seen countless other arguments waged against Christians and what they believe.
So instead of pretending to engage other Christians in honest dialogue maybe it would be better if you simply stated what you believe about scripture, and what it means to you. You don't need to qualify everything you believe by saying you are a Christian... if you are a Christian then it will evident. And if you aren't, that will be evident as well.
Originally posted by lemon limeEvident to whom?
You don't need to qualify everything you believe by saying you are a Christian... if you are, then it will evident. And if you aren't that will be evident as well.
You as Grand Arbiter?
You would have been great at the Salem Witch Trials or The Spanish Inquisition.
-Removed-Page 6 and then page 10 onwards on Thread 160396.
Proper Knob: If you had read the threads, why did you answer - 'nope' - when asked if you had?
lemon lime: As I said, I wasn't actually answering his question. I gave an answer to another question... a question he didn't ask.
Proper Knob: So you lied?
lemon lime: No, I just led him to believe what he wanted to believe... he didn't have to follow.
and so on...
Bang to rights! 😀
Originally posted by lemon limeChristians simply do not agree with each other on all points of doctrine, you must have noticed this. It's a hallmark of the Christians in this community too.
II started out with you in this thread in good faith, but all I've seen you do here is argue with Christians in the same way I've seen countless other arguments waged against Christians and what they believe.
You, for example, do not accept the Word of God as laid out in the Bible as evidence to support Christian doctrine and the Christian way of life, and yet the fact that 99% of Christians would probably think that such a stance is preposterous ~ especially coming from a self-described Christian ~ would give fairly 'probable cause' to at least query the basis of your self-description.
Nevertheless, until you started lying ~ by denying that you had suggested that divegeester was not a Christian [when you clearly had] ~ just about every single Christian and non-believer alike here probably accepted your description of yourself as a Christian in good faith.
But now you yourself even fall short of your own definition of a not-a-Christian: "Attacking (and attempting to discredit) Christians and key aspects of Biblical teaching doesn't make you a Christian. So if you didn't tell anyone you were a Christian, how would they know?" You could simply turn this little self-righteous blurt upon yourself and see if it fits.