23 Mar 11
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonYou are being untruthful again.
“....I certainly don't agree that scientists who do not agree with design are child abusers. ...”
LOL
I think that would be a very difficult assertion for (most) people to disagree with.
Everywhere you look is design.
You cannot look anywhere and not see design.
To say that there is not design, and then to teach this to children in the class room or text books, is abuse of power at the highest level........therefore child abuse.
Anyone that instruct a child with falsity is a child abuser.
Now you understand, and and there is nothing you can say to twist and manipulate your way around this truth.
So now the question is .....why do you continue to do it?
Why dont you become truthful and stop doing it?
Why dont you admit that everywhere you look ....there is design (it cannot be denied)
23 Mar 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAll the sources (greek lexicons), I have consulted give
I love that verse in 2 Timothy, the idea behind being fully equipped, or as you translation renders it 'adequate', for every good work, comes from the idea of a ship being fitted out for a long journey. One is reminded of course of life, which, like the sea, may be perilous and has its ups and downs, yet the man or women of God is equiped to deal with these.
'Natural', is not a very accurate rendering of the second verse.
"natural" for the translation of the Greek word used in
both American and British English. What do you think
is a more accurate word to use?
23 Mar 11
Originally posted by RJHindsDUDE.
"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching,
for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every
good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17 NASB)
"But the natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God;
for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them,
...[text shortened]... appraised." (1 Corinthians 2:14 NASB)
[From the Holy Bible - New American Standard Bible]
Just because I say that what I'm writing now is inspired by God and is rightious and divine, does not actually make it so.
(1 Shavixmir 4:12)
I am your Lord God. You do not need evidence outside of my belief in myself to see how blatantly true it and I are.
(2 Spirituality 2:6-7)
23 Mar 11
Originally posted by shavixmir“...I am your Lord God.. ..”
DUDE.
Just because I say that what I'm writing now is inspired by God and is rightious and divine, does not actually make it so.
(1 Shavixmir 4:12)
I am your Lord God. You do not need evidence outside of my belief in myself to see how blatantly true it and I are.
(2 Spirituality 2:6-7)
What!
“...You do not need evidence outside of my belief in myself to see how blatantly true it and I are (2 Spirituality 2:6-7) ...”
Oh, I see; you are not ACTUALLY saying you ARE God.
23 Mar 11
Originally posted by shavixmirMocking God's Holy Bible is not good
DUDE.
Just because I say that what I'm writing now is inspired by God and is rightious and divine, does not actually make it so.
(1 Shavixmir 4:12)
I am your Lord God. You do not need evidence outside of my belief in myself to see how blatantly true it and I are.
(2 Spirituality 2:6-7)
24 Mar 11
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonIf I did, however, you couldn't prove I'm not.
“...I am your Lord God.. ..”
What!
“...You do not need evidence outside of my belief in myself to see how blatantly true it and I are (2 Spirituality 2:6-7) ...”
Oh, I see; you are not ACTUALLY saying you ARE God.
24 Mar 11
Originally posted by AgergI do not agree that the Koran is a "holy" book nor
Defending the 'Holy' Bible when it is perhaps an affront to Allah (who has allegedly inspired the Qu-ran 'holy' book) might also not be good.
Indeed by many accounts, Allah isn't a god to be messed with! 😲
do I believe Mohammed was a prophet of God.
I believe Mohammed was a deceived man and the
Koran, a work of Satan. Allah can not tell the end
from the beginning like the God of the Holy Bible;
there are no prophecies that have been fullfilled.
The Holy Bible has many prophecies that have been
fullfilled, most of those were about Jesus (Yahshua)
the christ (messiah). Prophecies about the establisment
of the state of Israel and the returning of the Jewish
people to the land has happened in my lifetime.
24 Mar 11
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsI think you'll find that there is more than a shred of "proof" that Islam has some fine universal priciples at its core, as does christianity.
I do not agree that the Koran is a "holy" book nor
do I believe Mohammed was a prophet of God.
I believe Mohammed was a deceived man and the
Koran, a work of Satan. Allah can not tell the end
from the beginning like the God of the Holy Bible;
there are no prophecies that have been fullfilled.
The Holy Bible has many prophecies that have been
fullfi ...[text shortened]... ate of Israel and the returning of the Jewish
people to the land has happened in my lifetime.
In short, it seems both these two major religons have been corrupted by disinformation/misinformation.
Historical figures from pre-dark ages usually endure in a societie's collective memory,(pre written word), only if they have actually moved a whole people of the time. Like Jesus. His influence endured beyond him just being another crackpot who claimed he was god. He actually had a sort of point.
But there were other divinly inspired people throughout our Earths history, and I regret to inform you, Jesus was not the most powerful to grace our Earth.
But , lets just see if you respond to any of this before I blather on 🙂
24 Mar 11
To karoly aczel:
Islam mixes truth with error. That is the way Satan works
to deceive us. Yes, even in Christianity, Satan is working
to mix truth with error to deceive Christians. We must
be on our guard as the Holy Bible says. The difference is
the Holy Bible contains no error, unlike the Koran.
Islam believes Mohammed is the greatest prophet.
Islam teaches that Jesus (Yahshua) the christ (messiah) is
not the only begotten Son of God. It says Allah has no son.
Therefore, Allah is not the God of the Holy Bible which
clearly says God has a Son. You are obviously deceived
to say what you did about Jesus, God's only begotten Son,
who He gave as a ransom for our sins against Him, to
whoever will believe. Mohammed is clearly one of the false
prophets, Jesus prophecied would come after him. Do
you know any prophecy Mohammed made that has come true?
24 Mar 11
Originally posted by RJHindsHow can you say the Bible contains no error with a straight face?
To karoly aczel:
Islam mixes truth with error. That is the way Satan works
to deceive us. Yes, even in Christianity, Satan is working
to mix truth with error to deceive Christians. We must
be on our guard as the Holy Bible says. The difference is
the Holy Bible contains no error, unlike the Koran.
Islam believes Mohammed is the greatest prophet. ...[text shortened]... s prophecied would come after him. Do
you know any prophecy Mohammed made that has come true?
I could list 20 errors without any trouble at all.
The greatest error is that the fabricated Bible has attempted to turn the man Jesus into God.
The second greatest error is that the Bible allows the slaughter of animals to satisfy the uncontrolled tongue.
I could continue, but I have listed them before and to except the Bible blindly is another great error.
The thing is, the error is so clear to see that to defend it....makes for questionable motives.
24 Mar 11
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsDo you see how my implication that one shouldn't speak against the holy qu-ran was ineffective against you?
I do not agree that the Koran is a "holy" book nor
do I believe Mohammed was a prophet of God.
I believe Mohammed was a deceived man and the
Koran, a work of Satan. Allah can not tell the end
from the beginning like the God of the Holy Bible;
there are no prophecies that have been fullfilled.
The Holy Bible has many prophecies that have been
fullfi ...[text shortened]... ate of Israel and the returning of the Jewish
people to the land has happened in my lifetime.
It was ineffective because you don't believe the Qu-ran to be a true account of some deity and its actions.
Similarly, your claim one shouldn't mock the Bible was ineffective, indeed I could quite easily mock the Bible till the cows come home and have no fear of divine reprisals because I do not believe the Bible is a true account of some deity and its actions.
Moreover, as for vague and ambiguous prophecies, perhaps the Qu-ran, need not offer up such cheap parlour tricks on the basis that its chosen people (Muslims) will see its 'obvious' truth from reading the first page. Indeed, given the strength of the prophecies I've seen so far, the Bible looks very dubious.
24 Mar 11
Originally posted by RJHindsOnce again, you speak falsehood through ignorance. Have you read the Quran? How could you possibly know whether or not it contains prophesies that have been fulfilled?
....there are no prophecies that have been fullfilled.
The Holy Bible has many prophecies that have been
fullfilled, most of those were about Jesus (Yahshua)
the christ (messiah). Prophecies about the establisment
of the state of Israel and the returning of the Jewish
people to the land has happened in my lifetime.
It contains the exact same prophesy regarding the "establisment of the state of Israel and the returning of the Jewish people to the land", so either it contains a prophesy that has been fulfilled (and your claim was false) or the prophesy has not been fulfilled and your other claim (that the Biblical one has been fulfilled) is false. Either way, one claim is necessarily false and the other true. You are mixing truth with error. That is the way Satan works to deceive us.
24 Mar 11
3 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsYes, indeed, however, when you think of the term 'natural', it conjures connotations
All the sources (greek lexicons), I have consulted give
"natural" for the translation of the Greek word used in
both American and British English. What do you think
is a more accurate word to use?
of that which is good and wholesome, does it not? Clearly this is not what is
intended in the verse, for the term is contrasted with that which is spiritual, good
and wholesome.
The actual term itself, comes, as you are probably aware from the Greek,
psykhikos, which we are told pertains to the soul, literally, soulical. Yet even here
there is ambiguity as to what that actually means, for does it pertain to the mind,
the body or what. The Latin equivalent i think is more succinct and carries the
flavour of the intent, that being the term, animalis, which we derive animalistic, that
is unreasoning, pertaining to beasts etc.
Consider some alternative renderings,
The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of
God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are
discerned only through the Spirit. - NIV
But a natural man* does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are
foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually
appraised. - New American standard. * here it gives the cross reference to 1
Corinthians 15:44 where Paul contrasts a physical body (natural) with a spiritual one.
For a beastly man* perceiveth not those things that be of the Spirit of God - Wycliffe
New Testament - *here Wycliffe carries the thought of the latin text, although
perhaps goes a little too far.
But the sensual man* perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God; for it
is foolishness to him, and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined.
- Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition - * again Duay realises that it pertains not
to the spirit but to sensuality, that is to the physical rather than the spiritual.
From these different renderings it becomes apparent that what is being contrasted is
not that which is 'natural', but that which is physical, fleshly, unreasoning
, animalistic, pertaining to the physical senses as opposed to the operation of Gods
spirit which is perceived, spiritually. It is for these reasons that I dont feel 'natural',
is an accurate translation.