Religion… What do you think?

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@flashfyr: well, you just r*ped gods statememt.

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Also dont make me start about how stupid it is to post random verses without showing the whole picture.

you cannot discuss the books by only pointing out what you like/dislike.

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29453  Edited By FlashFyr

@flashfyr said:

@arthur_morgan:

Trump is an authority. God places all authorities into power. Therefore, God placed Trump into power.

Refute it or stop talking. I brought in the verse that pertains exactly to your hypocritical lifestyle. There's no reason I'd bring in all 200 pages of Romans with gibberish about women being silent in Church just to talk about your idiocy in claiming "I follow the Bible but don't submit to my government."

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@flashfyr: i dont need to refute it.

you are using an argument that doesnt even work.

whats there to refute?

like you dont even make sense and im not talking about what god wrote.

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

imagin that.

Some1 telling you to refute the fact that donald trump was placed by god.

just fckin imagin that.

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@flashfyr: i have been done a few post earlier but it was fun to see how stupid you can get with each post.

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29458  Edited By FlashFyr

@arthur_morgan:

there is no authority except that which God has established.

- Romans 13:1

Trump is an authority. God places all authorities into power. Therefore, God placed Trump into power.

"I live according to God's word but God didn't place Trump in power."

"what is there to refute?"

I'm not the one getting more stupid with every post.

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@flashfyr: oh yh, you are the one who keeps repeating nonsense like a broken record.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

ESTAPLISHED.

so god recognized donald trump.

lmao , when?

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha.

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29463  Edited By FlashFyr

@arthur_morgan: Lacking defense mechanisms in a debate is a good thing, dipshit.

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@flashfyr: depending on the situation.

here , its clearly a bad thing if you can only repeat yourself.

Zzzzzzzzz next.

Avatar image for icedemonking
IceDemonKing

10064

Forum Posts

1569

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

You know what we need to bring back? Good old-fashioned paganism.

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29466  Edited By FlashFyr

@arthur_morgan: Then you have unhealthy defense mechanisms for being unable to refute one point and having to repeat yourself, dipshit.

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@flashfyr: now you repeating what i said.

repeatception.

next.

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29468  Edited By FlashFyr

@arthur_morgan: Maybe I wouldn't need to if you had the two brain cells needed to recognize hypocrisy, dipshit.

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@flashfyr: let me quickly own you.

tell me , do you believe in god?

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29473  Edited By Arthur_Morgan

@flashfyr: So you established the authority along side other humans not god.

point refuted , thank you for your time.

i advice you to try not to misconcept god’s statements.

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29474  Edited By FlashFyr

@arthur_morgan: That's not a refutation, dipshit. You have a contradiction in your internal logic by believing the Bible but not believing what the Bible says. You simultaneously think all authorities are placed in power by God, yet Trump is an authority who was not placed in power by God. What the hell does me voting for authorities have to do with your worldview?

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@flashfyr: You just repeated the point i refuted but only made it longer............

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29476  Edited By FlashFyr

@arthur_morgan: For fuck sake, this is really simple.

Either:

God had nothing to do with Trump and the Bible is wrong because it says ALL authorities are placed by God (so your contradiction is living by a text that is factually wrong)

OR

God placed Trump into power but you don't submit to Trump's governing authority like the Bible tells you to (so your contradiction is in living against the Bible you believe in)

I maintain that your contradiction is with the first scenario.

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@flashfyr: now tell me in what time god made that statement.

if we chose trump than it does not apply to those all authorities god was talking about.

its simple and you are stupid.

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29478  Edited By FlashFyr

@arthur_morgan: There is no such thing as "all authorities except..."

All means 100%.

The Bible is saying ALL authorities are placed by God, it doesn't matter whether that system is democratic or monarchical.

> there is no authority except that which God has established.

Every authority that has been and EVER WILL come into existence is through God's establishment.

If there's such a case where God had nothing to do with an authority, then the Bible is WRONG because you cannot have a rule that says "all" yet there is an exception.

Avatar image for cyborgzod
cyborgzod

1112

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29479  Edited By cyborgzod

Why are people still arguing over two-thousand-year-old religious fan fiction?

Cant we go back to arguing over Thor vs Superman?

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

9610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29481  Edited By SpareHeadOne  Online
Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6274

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#29482  Edited By dshipp17

@hulkbusterx9:

“You told me to go find the evidence. In a debate, you don't tell people to find evidence, you bring it. All you're demonstrating by telling me to go find it is that you don't have any evidence.”

You're asking for evidence of something considered a cultural phenomenon all over the world; it's not like asking for evidence that a toad is in my garage; you're disputing something that most human beings are accepting as real and existing. So, you're trying to prove some new and revolutionary, when you're saying that you need evidence of something that the vast majority of the world accepts as true and real.

Basically, you're doing something akin to saying that you have a device that can allow people to travel back in time. Hence, you have the extraordinary challenge of convincing people that there is no God or that God is hard to at least speculate as being real, when most people know and have experienced the contrary. Hence, evidence for God should be easily relocatable for most people actually trying to find the information. Basically, you're asking me to find a McDonald's branch where you live or in New York, because you can't find it, so you claim. Surely, you can take the steps to find something so common and readily available, as information there's on God's behalf of all sorts.

Thus, hence, you're not really being genuine in your desire for evidence, as the information that's got most people convinced is all over the place, where not even people with the highest level of intention to know all of the available information couldn't have perform an exhaustive search that you imply that you've done with your statement. As God is such a phenomenon, your question denotes that you've done an exhaustive search, where you apparently can't even start talking about the evidence that Christian scholars find most convincing.

So, again, you actually have to make an effort to find information that can be obtained in the same vein as something like locating a restaurant chain in your area like a Burger King. Nobody could seriously think that you knew so little about Burger King that you wouldn't know where to start looking for one. I'm not trying to be off putting, it's just more that I don't like having someone insulting my intelligence, as I'd be in a catch 22 in either direction that I go with this: you want me to start bringing you information so that you can seem informed on the topic, by discussing what I know on the topic, as opposed to us discussing what you know about the topic; it has to go that way, as you're telling me something akin to your not thinking that a Burger King can be found anywhere in the western world (e.g. I'm being generous, as you're actually saying it can't be in the whole world). So, I have to gauge how much you actually know, not how much I know; you're claiming that it's hard to locate when it's something that shouldn't be.

“The only thing I implied is that you cannot prove he exists. I'm not saying he doesn't exist, i'm saying you can't prove he exists.”

Like, here, what are you talking about? You asked a totally separate topic related to God from whether or not He exists. You only think this because your knowledge on the topic is so limited; if not, demonstrate for me how exhaustive your knowledge is on God; so far, it couldn't be very much, if you can't discern Him from any other person claiming that they have gods around them, which was the topic that I provided that response for. My point: you have to be willing to discuss the topic rather that argue about a topic that you know very little about.

“An athiest would be denying the existence of any and every divine being. I haven't denied the existence of any or every divine being.”

So, here, seemingly, you're implying that there is more evidence somewhere elsewhere of something else comparable to claiming that God is real, where reality clearly shows us more informed individuals, otherwise; hence, another indication of how little you actually know about evidence for God, where you want to substitute what I know for what you know, when you're saying that you can't locate; so, actually look, as it's like trying to figure out how to locate a Burger King somewhere, if it can be found.

“I googled what the christian community is known for, and nothing came up about them having undeniable proof of the existence of God.”

Well, this is without credence, as you obviously didn't do anything remotely close to an exhaustive search for God's existence; and, it depends on what you mean by “undeniable proof”; that's arbitrary and open to interpretation, depending on who it is you're communicating with. The scholarly Christian community can only produce objective evidence that's acceptable in the largest set of inquiring minds; once that's achieved, that means that you just have to reconcile what you're looking for with the material that's most convincing to just about everyone else. Basically, you're left with trying to convince us that what we think that we know actually isn't the true state of affairs.

“The first video is just a short film about time travel, and the second one is just sculptures of a developing fetus. They don't provide any evidence whatsoever.”

Along with the sculptures, they quite clearly described it such that you could be convinced that God was real, provided you were actually trying to know.

In the clip, the part that I found most fascinating was at about the 8 minute mark; there, they showed how the early embryo develops into a fetus, referencing back to a Bible passage describing how that embryo formed into a fetus about 2700 years ago, long before that computer graphic output. For most who were actually listening, that should have been very intriguing food for thought; clearly, something that was mythological from so long ago wouldn't even be on the same planet of actually describing something so accurately so many years later, once technology was able to catch up. And, before your comment, I hadn't viewed the clip, but, I viewed the title and the source, which made me confident that they'd be discussing something that I intended, where this was even better than I was contemplating; that's very close to direct evidence level, as what human from 2700 years ago could have guessed in pursuit of developing a mythological story that clearly become popular so many years after it's production? And, no, this isn't a once or twice fluke, this type of demonstration is consistent in many different cases, within the scholarly Christian community; flukes don't take place on a regular; I'm pointing out from an objective perspective; someone can craft an argument against it, but, this is still going to remain objective material that most reasonable, honest people would see as intriguing.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

224793

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Why are people still arguing over two-thousand-year-old religious fan fiction?

Cant we go back to arguing over Thor vs Superman?

I think Religion is a little more than 2,000 year old Fan Fiction, General. As far as your other question, we still do argue about Thor vs Superman.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

9610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Thor is possibly two thousand years old anyway

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

9610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Jesus is "able even to subdue ALL THINGS to Himself." (Phil. 3:21)

Jesus came "that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times he might gather together in one ALL THINGS in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth in Him. In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works ALL THINGS according to the counsel of His will." (Eph. 1:10, 11)

"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering towards us, not willing that any should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9)

"God was in Christ reconciling THE WORLD to Himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And He has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ's ambassadors as though God were making His appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: be reconciled to God." (2 Cor. 5:19, 20)T or F

"ALL the nations shall be blessed." (Gal 3:8)

Avatar image for firestarlord73194
FireStarLord73194

6476

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Just a point of note... God doesn’t care for today’s political systems. The Bible foretells ALL governments of the Earth will be destroyed by the Kingdom of God. Daniel 2:44 says “in the days of those kings (that is the kingdoms and governments existing during the last days), the God of heaven will set up a Kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this Kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will CRUSH and put an end to all these kingdoms and it alone will stand forever.”

Everyone today is so divided and so focused on this party or that party, this nation or that nation. They miss the point that “it does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step” (Jeremiah 10:23) let alone directing the steps of millions. Lasting change will only come about through God’s Kingdom with Jesus Christ as king of that kingdom (Luke 1:32, 33) and his rule will affect more than one nation but “to it ALL the nations will stream” (Isaiah 2:2)

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29487  Edited By FlashFyr

@hulkbusterx9:

@dshipp17 prefers to spend 4 paragraphs skirting around his burden to bring 1/10000000000 pieces of objective evidence he thinks exists because, when he gets specific, it turns out he's either fallacious, factually wrong, or he has to solve the mystery with "might have" and "could have" which is just a bigger mystery, then he spends another 15 paragraphs straw manning you and rewriting history to cover it up.

@flashfyr said:

how did his family build a wooden ship that didn't twist and fall apart in such violent wind and water? Not only did they live before modern engineering, but they also used a subpar material that doesn't work for projects that big. Assuming the ark didn't get destroyed as wood should, how come the animals and humans weren't thrown around the interior by hundred-meter-tsunamis for over a month?

@dshipp17 said:

@flashfyr:

...

“Further, how did his family build a wooden ship that didn't twist and fall apart in such violent wind and water? Not only did they live before modern engineering, but they also used a subpar material that doesn't work for projects that big. Assuming the ark didn't get destroyed as wood should, how come the animals and humans weren't thrown around the interior by hundred-meter-tsunamis for over a month?”

The dimensions for the ship are provided in the Bible. This design has been reconstructed and it proved to be quite viable for the task at hand. Plus, the Bible is also an approximation of what was said entirely, so, there was probably more involved. But, with what we have, the design was tested and proved viable.

@flashfyr said:

Cite your information for a wooden ship that can withstand hundred-meter-tsunamis for a month. Seriously. It would revolutionize our current building methods in everything, because modern shipbuilders created a wooden vessel that was destroyed in conditions that weren't half as bad as what a global flood would entail.

@dshipp17 said:

@flashfyr:

“Cite your information for a wooden ship that can withstand hundred-meter-tsunamis for a month. Seriously.”

I already suggested that, likely, the Ark didn't get affected by the worst of the event, as this question presumes to have been happening; as God shut the Ark door, God probably navigated or actively controlled the Ark for stability purposes; likely, the Ark probably just largely flouted in that Middle Eastern area of the globe, where, after the Flood, the weather appeared to remain somewhat stable, somehow; likely, something that God somehow accounted for and made possible. But, sure, something was likely different about the material/wood used to build the Ark, something not accounted for by the Bible, as it isn't a full and complete instruction manual of how the Ark was built; just, what's still left (e.g. the dimensions) proved viable to at least be a sea vessel.

BLATANTLY DODGED MY REQUEST FOR ANY 'VIABLE' RECREATION OF THE ARK AND NEEDED TO ANSWER WITH A BIGGER MYSTERY ^

@flashfyr said:

@dshipp17:

You said we have recreations of an ark that can withstand the conditions I put forward, so cite them. This response sounds like switching to a related argument so that you can escape supporting something you said. "This design has been reconstructed and it proved to be quite viable for the task at hand."

@dshipp17 said:

“You said we have recreations of an ark that can withstand the conditions I put forward, so cite them.”

I didn't say this, at all; I said that they've reconstructed the Ark, based on the dimensions provided in the Bible and shown it to be viable; in response, you raised the issue of rough currents.

1. I didn't say this, at all

> a wooden ship that didn't twist and fall apart in such violent wind and water

> This design has been reconstructed and it proved to be quite viable for the task at hand.

2. in response, you raised the issue of rough currents.

I talked about rough currents in the first message; that was the problem he had to solve in HIS FIRST REPLY. I didn't raise currents sheerly in response to his assertion there's a viable reconstruction.

Don't bother. This is the kind of person you're debating with.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

9610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for firestarlord73194
FireStarLord73194

6476

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@spareheadone said:

@firestarlord73194:

Will Jesus come and make war in this world?

Of course he will.

Psalm 37:10- “Just a little while longer and the wicked will be no more, you will look at where they were, and they will not be there.”

Revelation 19:11- “I saw heaven opened and look! A white horse. And the one seated on it is called Faithful and True, and he judges and carries on WAR in righteousness”

Revelation 19:19- “and I saw the wild beast and the kings of the earth (Modern day political systems and governments) and their armies gather together to wage war against the one seated on the horse (Jesus) and against his army.”

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

9610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for firestarlord73194
FireStarLord73194

6476

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

224793

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29492  Edited By King Saturn

I always thought it was a little weird that Jesus would be on a Horse waging war against Earth's Armies and Kingdoms. You would think The Son of The Almighty would not need be on a Horse but could just Fly around shooting Energy Beams from his Arms like Galactus or something.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

9610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn:

White horse fetish?

Appearance of The-Saviour at the end

Buddhism

There will be a future Buddha, who will lead the world at a future period into a new age, and he will bear the name of Maitreya.

The Buddha of this age said there would come a time when “it does not rain; and while it rains not, all seedlings and vegetation, all plants, grasses, and trees dry up, wither away and cease to be. Maitreya will come in a time when the ocean will have lost much of its water, and there will be much less of it than now.” After six more periods of time the universe would be burnt up into nothingness.

Zoroastrianism

Saoshyant, or Astvat-ereta, the future saviour of the world will come forth from a Lake and will carry the weapon of heroes “Verethragna” (smiting of resistance) (slayer of the blocker). Saoshyant will triumph in the final battle of the end of the age, and he will resurrect the dead, whose bodies will be restored to eternal perfection, and whose souls will be cleansed and reunited with God. Time will then end, and truth/ righteousness and immortality will thereafter be everlasting.

Sikhism

Kalki shall return on horseback with sword and sounding his trumpet before fighting the wicked. The Lord Himself will manifest as the Supreme Purusha. He will be called the Kalki incarnation and will be glorious like a lion coming down from heaven.

Tibetan Buddhism

The great king Gesar will return from Shambhala in a time of brutal wars and atheism that threatens the very survival of Buddhism. The last king of Shambhala will be called the Rudrachakrin (“Powerful king holding an iron wheel’). He will appear on a slavering white horse and his general Hanumandu will ride at his side. With his spiritual powers he will defeat an evil earthly leader from the west who is conquering the world and even Shambhala itself.

Hinduism

At the end of the age when even among civilized gentlemen and so-called saints there is no mention of the Lord, and when the power of government is transferred to the hands of ministers elected from the evil men, when the twice-born [the higher classes] and the government consisting of members of the laborer class itself never under any circumstances take to His hymns, paraphernalia, altars and words, then, at the end of the Age of Dissent, the Supreme Lord [Kalki], the chastiser will appear.

The spiritual master of all the moving and nonmoving beings, Lord Vishnu, the Controller of All, will for the protection of the religion and the saintly put an end to the fruitive activities and the [repeatedly] being born. In the village of S’ambhala Lord Kalki will appear in the home of the great soul, the brahmin Vishnuyas’â [‘the glory of Vishnu’]. Mounting His swift horse Devadatta, the Lord of the Universe endowed with His sword, transcendental qualities and the eight mystic opulences [siddhis], will subdue the ones who turned away from the holy. On His horse moving with speed about the earth He, unrivaled in His splendor, will slaughter the thieves disguised in the garb of kings. When all the robbers have been killed, the minds of all the citizens and the people living in the countryside will clear up being touched by the breeze which carries the most sacred fragrance of the [with sandalwood paste] decorated body of Lord Vâsudeva. When Vâsudeva, the Supreme Lord, is situated in their hearts in His transcendental form of goodness, the culture of their progeny will flourish as never before. When the Supreme Lord Kalki, the Lord and Master of Dharma, incarnates, Satya-yuga and the creation of progeny in the mode of goodness will begin. 948

Islam

And indeed, Jesus will be [a sign for] knowledge of the Hour [of judgment], so be not in doubt of it, and follow Me. This is a straight path. 949

Abu Hurayrah narrates that the Messenger of Allah said, “By Him in whose hands my soul rests! It is definitely close in that time that Isa [Jesus], Son of Maryam [Mary] descends amongst you as a just ruler. He will break the cross, kill the swine and abolish jaziya. And money will abound in such access that no one will accept it. 950

Avatar image for firestarlord73194
FireStarLord73194

6476

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn said:

I always thought it was a little weird that Jesus would be on a Horse waging war against Earth's Armies and Kingdoms. You would think The Son of The Almighty would not need be on a Horse but could just Fly around shooting Energy Beams from his Arms like Galactus or something.

John prefaces in Revelation that the visions he had were “presented in signs” meaning a lot of it was symbolic. (Revelation 1:1) The section saying Jesus is coming on a horse also says war, famine, pestilence and death are also riding in on horses. (Revelation 6:2-8) Logically these are not actual beings but symbols for what will be occurring on the earth during the last days as Jesus had earlier foretold (Luke 21:10, 11) Of course he doesn’t need a horse, the Bible doesn’t support the idea there are even horses in Heaven. 1 Timothy 6:16 says of Jesus that he “dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or CAN see” When Jesus comes waging war it won’t be as a human. Jesus is a spirit, he’s not made of flesh and blood anymore... therefore he is invisible. So when he comes it will be more so the affects of his power we will see not physically him on a horse. The horse is symbolic for just how swift his destructive works will be (1 Thessalonians 5:3)

Avatar image for kwjouse
kwJouse

40

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

When it comes to moral issues, it's weird.

Without God, is everything allowed? Of course not.

Everything is possible, but not allowed. The fact that moral conscience has an origin does not mean that God is the only answer to that. And even less justifies that we have to serve an entity and feel submissive to it. In the case of animals, just as there is a prevalence of the strongest based on hitherto "selfish" actions, there is cooperation between species for the common good of survival. If there is a concept of good and bad subjected to a standard, it does not mean that there is a conscious legislator who establishes that standard, the evolution of man himself takes account of this phenomenon. Man is his own god, regardless of whether he can see this or separate his conscience in two: one to whom he treats as a deity and the other as himself who submits to it. God exists as a concept, but not as a determining force of past or future, much less as a being prior to and after human existence. God (concept) was born with man and will die with him. To establish certainties is to become selfish, doubt is the benefit of being aware. I am neither a believer nor an non-believer, I just try to think lucidly (which will never be 100%).

Anyways, talking about God does not make it existent as a being, only as an idea. (Just my opinion)

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

9610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29496  Edited By SpareHeadOne  Online
Avatar image for kwjouse
kwJouse

40

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29497  Edited By kwJouse

@spareheadone said:

Do you love Shiva-Shakti?

I'd rather love Jesus, kek

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

9610

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for arthur_morgan
Arthur_Morgan

1942

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29499  Edited By Arthur_Morgan

@flashfyr: gg ignoring the whole context of a statement.

its like you read it and thats it , no thought put into it whatsoever.

btw if authorities go against what god actualy wants than they are not established by default.

Im gonna say it again.

dont post random tiny statements from a book with countless pages.

Avatar image for flashfyr
FlashFyr

1982

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29500  Edited By FlashFyr

@arthur_morgan: What context? It's the first line of Romans 13. If I'm wrong then show me the actual text in Romans that contradicts what I'm saying, dipshit. Not what you think reality is; show me THE TEXT.