The pyramids built by aliens? Lol, I saw the movie alien vrs predator and supposidly it was the predators that tought us how to do that. On the subject of adam and eve, this is not related to this though if adam and eve had babies those people would have to have babies with eachother so sisters and brothers were you know, so they were all related so if that really happened and you believe in adam and eve then that would mean that everyone in the world is blood related to everyone so whenever your doing you know what with someone else your doing you know what with a relative. What you think about that?

@Memphis

I corrected my statement. I thought you were saying that the Romans would not bow down. Either way you need to understand that the Romans were very tolerant of Jesus and his followers. They gave them many warnings about preaching there is only one god. It was only because Jesus and his followers forced the issue on believing in only one god that the christians were persacuted.

The persacution of christians is one of the biggest lies ever told. If you want to know if the church lies to you this is a perfect example. Go talk to a history teacher and ask him if what I have told you is true. When he tells you that it is true the romans were tolerant of Jesus and only asked him not to publicly offend others by calling their gods false gods, then you will know how much the church lies.

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 8:01:26 AM

Christians weren't persecuted for 300 years? Prove it.

Don't cry for me Argentina. Ignorance is bliss. My 5 1/2 years in college and my three degrees in Marketing, PR and Mass Communications are just a ruse. The 30+ home sales I average per year is just enough to garner my family from eating a steady diet of government cheese. XD

Hahahaha. There's no God he says, but because he watches Battlestar Gallactica he knows there is life on other planets.

I'm sure you're bantering about me in regards to reading the Bible. I'm a second generation Sicilian. Do a Google search, as you've been doing in all of your posts, and research a little bit about Sicilians.

Hmm, I wonder if Christians were ever persecuted? Wait. I can Google too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians
Oh and how about what's going on today in Eastern Africa, particularly the Sudan.

You can beam me up Crow! Just don't ping flood servers anymore, and keep the anal probe at home.
XD

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 8:19:13 AM

@Jet - There were scriptures before 100AD. They were the Old Testament.
- You should really go back and edit your misquote of Memphis (July 27, 5:56am )
- We don't feel air. We feel the wind. Subtle difference.
- Christians believe they are an extension of Judism, which itself was formalized with the giving of the Law of Moses, but reaches back to the Creation. So in that sense, Christianity and Judism are some of the oldest religions around and far from being new.

- You're doing a strange thing here. You're refering to books of the Bible that Protestants generally don't accept in order to make points concerning their faith (and what's wrong with it). I can't see how that makes sense. "We" basically reject what you're rejecting, but then you fault us for supposedly believing in it.
- Could you support your assertion that the Bible is tailored by the church to keep the collections coming in? Especially since the Bible is one of the best supported collections of ancient writings. We have better copies of Old and New Testament writings than we do for other ancient texts, but the Bible is the one people like to go after.

- In keeping with your logic concerning God's nonexistance, I can claim that there are no pink and purple flying Winky-Wigs anywhere in the universe. Until someone produces one, they don't exist.

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 9:09:46 AM

These are primary source documents of the Christian persecution:

Format: Writer, Document, Year

Tacitus, Annales, xiii. Pg 32 The Trial of Poponia Gracecina, AD 57

Tacitus, Annales xv. 44 The Neronian Persecution , AD 64

Seutonius, Vita Claudii, xxv. 4 The Expulsion of the Jews from Rome, also seen in Acts 18

Pliny the Younger, Plin. Epp. X (ad. Trajan), xcvi, Christians in Bithbynia

Persecution of Domition

Maryrdom pf Ignatius

The Matyrdom of Polycarp

Persecutions at Lyons and Vienne, Gallican Churches, Eusebius

Persecution under Decius

Persecution under Valerian

Persecution under Diocletion

As an example to how science is not always right...

My mother has a condition she was born with that prevents her from having kids
yet she has two, me and my sister
although science says its impossible for me to even exist, I have a birth certificate stating that yes, I am indeed real and living
so if science says I cant exist, that if I am just a mistake...

How much should I trust science?

And if, according to your science, I shouldent exist (yet I clearly do)... Does that leave other things open for question?
and if I exist clearly by chance, what about my sister?

There is not many places where chance and science are seperated
evolution is based mainly on chance, referred to as "mutations" in the DNA

But here, if it's chance, science is wrong, but if it isn't chance, science is right and I dont exist
and before anyone can say there must be a scientific reason for my mother to have kids despite her condition, there isnt
there are more complications than this... I wont go into them on behalf of my mothers privacy
and she has been looked at by three doctors... And all they have for her is a pill to take everyday for her current problems... No answers

What does science have to say about me?

@JetJaguar-

You have your facts wrong about this:

First off, the Scriptures, (Old and New Testament) began thousands of years ago. Jewish writings are attributed to Moses himself (the Pentateuch). There is little disagreement among scholars that these writings date from at least 621 BC, when they were found in the temple in Jerusalem. Some refuse to say they were older than that, but non-radical critics insist these texts were dated from the time of Moses.

As far as New Testament texts, there aren't many existing fragments of text from before 100 AD, but the people who read these texts were not far removed from the well known events. If there had been fiction written into the texts, the persons who put these lies in place would have been called on it. For more on reliability of scripture, try http://www.allabouttruth.org/origin-of-the-bible.htm (Yes, I know it's from a Christian point of view, but look at the facts.)

I've done much research into the reliability of scriptures, and found the writings to be very reliable. You are welcome to conclude otherwise, but give it as unbiased and fair a look as you can first. That might mean putting aside your views to study first. I've seen the kinds of texts you mention. Maybe you could take a look at what I brought?

I wonder why you can find the idea of an alien visitor to the garden plausible, yet so offhandedly reject accurate histories. In my opinion, you carry some real baggage from your past. I mean no disrespect to you or your family, but you seem to have been scarred by what I'll call "the camp incident". Could it be that your anger at what was done in the past has led you to presume there is no God? Does that presumption color your analysis?

As far as persecution, it's factual. It's been going on in different places at different times, but it's real. I found a good overview of the Roman persection at http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch23.htm . There are persecutions going on in modern times, too. Google around if you want some accounts. I was a persecutor in the past, but in small ways.

I don't want to get into an argument over this topic, but offer some resources and questions if you want them.

@warfare,

Immaculate conception..lol.... Or just a dang mould spore that didn't know when to stop growing.. Hehehhe

@Rogue

You just make yourself look more stupid every time you post so why do it? Yawn, so you know how to google, Wow. Unfortunately your vast education did not teach you to read. If you would read the link you posted it speaks nothing of the persacution of Jesus. Your link speaks of the persacution by Nero in 64 A.D. This is because everyone already hated the Christians because they went around insulting everyone elses gods. So you have done nothing but prove that you talk but don't think. Nothing you have said in any of your posts makes any sense. George Bush graduated from Yale and he can't even read the paper. Hell I used to teach college classes but that alone does not make me smart.

@Rabban

Ok I should have said they were not found or compiled until 100 A.D. Though I am not an expert in this area it is my understanding that the only proof given about these books being written before christ was born is that many of the civilizations spoken about in the old testament are known to have existed at those times. Many scientists and religious scholars have tried to prove the existance of people who were spoken of in the old testament such as Moses, David, and so on, but they have not been able to prove one single person existed other than what is written about in the bible. Yes there is evidence that many of these civilizations did exist but there is no proof that any of the events depicted in the bible actually happened there.

Look if you are gonna make an arguement make one that makes sense. So far you are the only person who backs up what he says with some facts. Don't dissapoint me.

Christians believe they are an extension of Judaism. YES! That is exactly right. If you can admit that then you must admit that the bible was written for the Jews. Look I've studied the New and Old and unless you believe that the old testament is completely false which as far as I know no christian religion does than when god speaks to you and says you are "spittle" how do you over come that? Now you'll try to say that the protestant religion does not accept these as religious text but in fact they do accept them they simply don't teach it in their churches or put them in their bible.

The only justification offered that Esdras is not acceptable is they say they do not know who wrote it. It was found with many of the other texts that are accepted. This is exactly what I was saying about tailoring the bible so it is more believable.

I completely agree with you, I did not state a fact that there were aliens simply that I believe there are. I then also offered a reasonable hypothesis as to why I believed it. I promise I won't try to force you to believe in my invisible people if you do not try to force me to believe in yours.

@LGM

Yes as I told Rabban I mistated that. My apologies. I would like to see something that talks about the old testament being found in 621 B.C. Send a link if you have it but please don't send links from religious websites. They are extremely biased and cannot be trusted, no offense.

I never said I believed that the snake in the garden of eden was an alien and I think that was pretty clear. I only responded to what Cat was saying. I believe the word is rhetorical.

@Supra

Where the hell have you been man? You've been missing out on some good religious debate.

Well again I did not state that christians weren't persacuted just that they weren't persacuted for being christians. It was in fact atleast in Jesus' time that they were insulting everyone elses religions when those other religions did not try to impose themselves on christians. Jesus and his followers were asked or warned many times to stop going out in the streets of Rome and telling everyone that the roman gods are false gods and that the christian god was the only god. This is the reason the persacution began. Christians like to play the wounded animal and say that they were persacuted for being right. That is total garbage man. This is also the reason the Jews were not persacuted as the christains were. The Jews did not care about what others thought or what god they observed.

@Warfare

I have looked back through the entire thread and I have not seen any post that claims science is always right. Science does however always base it's theory's or scientific facts on real information that is gathered and proven. Or in case of a theory facts that indicate it may be correct. Christians say things like that to try to debunk science because it is a threat to their beliefs. Science, like the Romans, does not attempt to force it's views on christians. Science for instance has proven many things about the bible. They know through carbon dating when the books were actually written, that certain civilizations mentioned in the bible did actually exist, and that some of the people written about in the new testament did actually exist. Science has not however even been able to support christianity as a theory.

In more recent years christians have started attacking science because carbon dating has proven that the Shroud of Turin was not the death shroud of Jesus. Not even close. Christians didn't take this news well Lol.

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 12:05:00 PM

I did not say anyone said science was always right
I was just stating my point as proof of the statement "Science is not always right"...
do I need to be provoked to be worthy of saying anything?
science does not threat my beliefs, then again, why should I care?
if science had its way, I wouldent have been born

Yes jet, it is a Scientific Fact on very Real Information that has been Gathered and Proven that women with this condition Cannot have children
since my own mother wont tell me what the condition is called I have nothing for you to google... Sry
but if this scientific fact contradicts my existance (and I am very much real), how can science expect to prove or disprove something as extraordinary as the existance of God?

BTW: on the topic of carbon dating, it is very accurate. I dont argue with it, yet, there is always the possibility of contamination...
somewhere in a previous post I listed some links
somewhere on that site there is a comment on carbon dating and its relevancy...(and this site is not a christian site either...)

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 12:13:18 PM

@Warfare

I did not mention anything about your mother and I won't now. You are still suggesting though that I am saying that science is always right and I have not. I simply trust it more because they use Scientific Fact or very Real Information that has been Gathered and Proven.

Again I am not saying any one said anything...
no where did I say you said anything about my mother but you did say something about science
my mother is the example, the subject is science... Stop putting words in my mouth!

You are using science to disprove christianity and I am using the situation as an example of science
if science proved my mother could not have children since she was born (yet here I am), how can you use science to disprove something that is of way bigger proportion with facts of equal relevancy

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 12:25:56 PM

Jet- man you are really showing bias. I wrote a paper on the Shroud of Turin in the 80's, and I concluded that it didn't matter if it were real or not. I think it's better that it is NOT real. That thing could be seen as an idol to some... It's just some cloth. It did have an interesting image on it, though.

As far as the 621 date, try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuteronomist I don't fully agree with all the statements there, but the date is solid.

You say we should be willing to look at all sources, but you reject religious sources offhand. If the religious people didn't keep the records of these things, who else would have bothered? No one. The scriptures were kept by those who valued them, of course. So, rejecting them as a source isn't exactly fair, is it?

Keep seeking, Jet

@jet

Hey man! Didnt see this thing going on... Some thoughts:

While I do agree with you that there were times of calm for believers, I think you oversimplify the persecution situation in the Roman Empire. I think this it is chasing a rabbit, but I responded to your comment above: "The persecution of Christians is one of the biggest lies ever told." My above posts were to provide direct historical documents to show otherwise. These documents are NOT written by Christians, and relate some different information than what you were describing.

Even in the context in which you describe it, its seems off base. The Roman Emperor was eventually viewed as God himself, and very quickly the Romans figured out that they could "test" the loyalty of their people, Jews and Christians alike, by insisting that they burn incense to the Emperor (an act of worship) and swear allegiance. When they would not, they were forced to go to the temple to do this. When they refused, they were tried for NOT worshipping the Roman Gods (emperor, or the temple of Unknown Gods). In Pliny the Youngers written record to Emperor Trajan, Pliny indicates that he asked Christians if they were Christians three times, and then threatened capitol punishment if they would not recant. This was ONLY rectified when they cursed the name of Christ and burned incense and wine at the altar of the Emperor. IF they refused, they were killed. These Christians were sought our BECAUSE of their unwillingness to worship the Emperor and DENY Christ. Pliny the Younger and the Emperor Trajan were not Christians.

I dont think the Romans were concerned with Jesus too much. After all, he went throughout the country speaking and teaching, without Roman interference for the most part. In angering the Jewish religious leaders of the time is when he got into trouble, as the leaders yielded considerable pull on the Romans, and could be responsible for instability in the region, which Rome did not want. The Roman Procurator found nothing wrong with what Jesus was doing and DID not want to be involed in what the religious leaders were doing. (Matthew 27:21-24)

In another comment, you stated that Jews caused no problems. Early Christians were mostly all Jews - they did not differntiate themselves as being non-Jews for quite some time. In AD 66, Jewish nationalism reached a boiling point, four years later the Romans destroyed Jerusalem. At that time, the Jerusalem church had relocated to Pella - a mostly Gentile community. Your statement that Jews were not causing problems is totally false.

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 12:52:57 PM

@Warfare

I did not put words in your mouth. This is what you said. Your example is a pretty wasted. You know we don't have any of the factual information on what you or your mother are going through and personally I don't want it as I'm sure it is personal.

@LGM

Jesus man If we are going to play the biased link game trust me we'll be here forever. What I was saying isn't that I reject religious text just that I reject that an obvoiusly biased website is giving out disinformation about the origins of the text. They don't use facts to back up their info just more conjecture. Of course a religious website is going to be biased. And no I will not accept anything as fact from a biased website and have not asked anyone else to do so.

And by the way the Wikipedia website does seem to be a good reference.

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 12:42:36 PM

Hey, I'm not the one who can accept little green men before the idea of their being a Spirit.

^ LOL

I've never seen anyone generalize more than you.

So, should you be persecuted now for preaching Atheism?

The link I provided has everything, it even offers up debate and criticism. It's a rather good link. You talked of Christian persecution being BS and not solely Jesus.

Your argument has gone from "I'm sure" to "I trust." Which is it? Why do you get upset when others use the the words "I believe" or "I think," yet these same words seem to be included with your FACTS.

Esdras is not unanimously accepted considering that it is contradictory to other chapters. It simply did not pass canonization because of these contradictions. Hence it is not accepted to be the actual word of God. Woo. Tough one.

But, I'm just a dummy. So what does it matter. I'm no scientist but I'm still hoping they can tell me if eggs are good or not.

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 1:06:15 PM

Yes they are contradictory from the new testament because the kjv was written to have the churches and king james views of that time.many things were left out or rewritten.the old testament should be followed not the new kjv that would be more true than the kjv.then if you believe these too books of god look at the sumerians story of the geat flood thousands of years before the old testament and new testament.the stories from sumerians are also in old and new testament with different character names.hmmmmm.@all Instead of attacking others for there disbelief and beliefs just give your opinions

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 1:09:33 PM

@Supra

I did not say that the Jewish people did not cause problems I simply stated that they did not try to impose their religious beliefs on others.

I never said they were.

Again the time you are refering to is 112 A.D.(after the death of christ). I am well aware of these facts but this all stems from the original hatred of christians from the time of Jesus. Christians made there bed but whine about having to sleep in it.

Here is a quote from the Letter that Pliny sent to Trajan. "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of one Chrestus". This he was refering to what had reallly happened in the time of christ. You are misreading the letter from Pliny to Trajan. What Pliny was doing about the christian problem was in response to the fact that christians had for over 100 years been calling other peoples gods "false gods". Yes Nero, Pliny, and Trajan eventually had to go to great lengths such as killing because the christians were so disrupting society. But in the begining they had only asked that Jesus not hold public forums and renounce other gods as fakes. Because Jesus and his followers would not listen they then banished the Jews and when that didn't work yes of course they were killed. I'm not saying that the romans were right for killing people but it was the christians(or jews) who forced their hand. All they had to do was worship their god in private and there would never have been a problem and all the persacutions that came later may never have occured.

The Bible was written for Jews. Hmmm, interesting. For the most part, I can go along with that concerning the OT since its a record of their history, but even there we find non-Jews given the opportunity to reconcile with God. The city of Ninevah comes to mind for starters. Now the NT is another story. I guess you could say the Gospels were written for the Jews, but most of the letters were written to Christian churches by Paul. And it seems you're kinda misunderstanding what the Bible is, a collection of holy books designed to allow any reader to know and understand God's plan for salvation. It started with God's created people (Adam and Eve), then focused down on Abraham and his descendants (who later became known as Hebrews and Jews) then eventually opened up to all people through Christ (the original intent, God having a relationship with His creation).

Now I've noticed you're quite hung up on this "spittle" reference (which I've yet to see documented so I can look it up), but taken as is, God often describes people in very humbling ways. I think this is a real methphor to impress upon us our worthlessness when compared to a supreme, omnipotent God and how great His mercy and compassion is toward us that He even considers us and loves us.

And you're telling me Protestants accept Esdras? Really? Then is should be in my Bible. It ain't. You claim a conspiracy, but so far its only a claim. And I think its not in the Bible because it doesn't pass the criteria for inclusion. Not knowing the author isn't really a reason for exclusion since there is debate on who wrote Hebrews and other books of the Bible (like the Pentateuch, those most agree Moses did it).

This is your air quote...

I don't know about you, but as I sit in my chair I can't feel any air about me. When I move my hand through it, I feel air currents (aka wind), but I don't feel the substance of air. I'm sure I could bring in a device to measure the elements that make up the air and I'm sure my body will react if there's too much or too little oxygen in the air, but I ain't feeling the air. We know there's air cause we're not passing out from the lack of it and we can feel its effects on us. I think its the same with God.

And here's a link to modern day persecution of Christians. Voice of the Martyrs has plenty of tales of non-American Christians being beated and killed just for trying to practice their faith. Really, America as a post-modern society isn't the best place to consider the Christian faith in its purity. You gotta get to those 3rd world nations to get down to the basics as expressed by the 1st century church. Many of the things we're missing in our Americanized faith can be found in China, North Korea, Afganistan and Iraq. An easy life makes us fat and lazy. :(

@Gamera

Just ignore Rogue. He didn't come here to offer anything intelligent, he's just trying to stir things up. If you read his posts you can see he is only skimming over the posts he's not actually reading them. Reading does not seem to be one of his strong suits.

I'm incapable of that. Only you and what you call "facts" are.

Rabban, even I knew that about Esdras and I've not flipped open a bible in five years. I do like your air and God metaphor though.

That would be all fine an dandy Gamera, but when one says that all Christians are in a state of mass hysteria it's kind of hard to ignore.

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 1:18:20 PM

@Rabban

Sorry dude but I'm done for the day. I'll respond tomorrow.

@all

Now does anyone understand what the hell that is supposed to mean?

It means even what you call facts can easily be contested.

For instance:
...everyone hated Christians
...Christians whine about the bed they made
...the Church lies and Christians are fools.

Those aren't facts. You ignore other facts and only accept those that are of convenience to your position.

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 1:24:05 PM

@ Jet

Seems like your putting words in my mouth to me...

And then something that has relevance to the trustworthyness of science you utterly dismiss, yet anything that discusses the relevancy of religion you focus on
you are talking about what other people have wrote, here is MY LIFE! Here is WHAT I LIVE!
and you are implying I am lying "You know we don't have any of the factual information..."
why would I lie? It is only a fact, you seem to like facts
but you dont seem to like facts that dont make your argument
My birth takes a shot at science, the same science you are leaning on for this discussion

Me and my mother are not "going through" anything
she had a check up and they found this and some other things... No big deal... Take some pills and its over

And of course my example is wasted... I cant give you any names, nor can I give you a link, for this I am sorry
and I cant expect you to care, I am just another person with a lower IQ that you can trample on with your big vocabulary
but I can give you a first hand account of what is going on...

Here is a fact that involves no sort of bias:
"I should not exist according to your science"

And here is a question:
"if science cant allow me to live, yet here I am, what does it say about science?"

Honestly I am making a good point, it does not involve religion much... But it does involve science
I am playing by your rules here
You are attacking religion and everyone else is defending, a situation you are used to I think
but you are the fact man
tell me, why can science allow me to live if clearly it says I shouldent?
you dont need any details to answer this if you trust science...

If science is wrong once, could it possibly be wrong about ANYTHING you have said at all?
if ANYTHING you said at all is wrong, could that POSSIBLY make ONE THING we say right?

You have studied
you have learned
you know
and thats all that matters right?

@warfare

I'm not going to continue responding to you. Your arguement is pointless. You would have everyone believe that some doctor told your mother she can't have children and because of that we should all believe in god. That's just stupid.

@jet

The quote attributed to Pliny is NOT from that document. It is from Suetonius (ref. To your quote about Chrestus). The quote you gave is actually about the expulsion and persecution by Claudius in AD 52 - again private quarrels between Jewish and Christian teachers within the synagogues.

I'm sorry Jet, we will agree to disagree. Making the histroical case that the Christians are to blame for their own deaths is ridiculous. Rome was relatively free, but only inasmuch as it didnt contradict the Emperor's God status, his agenda, his Gods, etc. Remember, Rome was a a nation that frequently conquested.

Nero was a lunatic. Suggesting otherwise is laughable in the historical arena. Tacitus records that the Christians were beaten, ripped apart by beasts, crucified, dipped and pitch and set on fire to illumine parties, etc. Tacitus was nota Christian - but a historian. He concluded that: "All of this gave rise to a feeling of pity, even towards men whose guilt merited the most exemplary punishment; for it was felt they were being destroyed not for the public good but to gratify the cruielty of an individual (Nero)" Tacitus, Annales, xv. 44. This was 64 AD.

Pliny was writing to Trajan to get reassurance for his actions. I am not misreading it. He approached potential Christians, verified that they were in fact Christians (asking them three times), and threatened capitol punishment if they did not recant. Trajan then responds and confirms his actions are correct, but also suggested that time to recant be allowed (meaning burn incense at the altar and swear allegience to one - the Emperor). Pliny writes in listing what was done: (6) They all worshipped your image (Trajan) and the statues of the gods and cursed Christ. Pliny continues about their practices: basically they would meet at sunrise together, in private, sing a hymn, take a vow against theft, robbery, breach of faith, and not to deny a deposit (Payment) when requested. Trajan had also OUTLAWED all secret meetings - which Pliny enforced with the believers (in reference to them eating a meal together). He also talks about torturig two deaconesses "to find out more of the truth" but concludes that there is nothing dangerous or of concern.

Whew - these are long. The point: Your suggestion that if the Christians would have worshipped in private, none of this would have happened. Well at first they did - they worshipped in the synagogues, and in their homes friend. This went on for quite some time. This is historical. Your assertion that they somehow got what they deserved is proposterous.

And like you said - rest until tomorrow.... We're all tired now.. :) But excellent discussion - for those keeping it civil...

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 1:47:21 PM

My arguement is not pointless, it is very valid
you are relying on science to make your point
to make my point I state an example of science not living up to your expectations
therefore not being worthy of holding up your end of the argument

When did you research this stuff first hand? All you have done is read what everyone else did.

I am not saying you should believe in god because of my mothers condition
where did I say this?? Huh? Where is your support for that claim?
stop putting words in my mouth!

I am saying you should question your own material before confronting anyone elses
I am attacking science
obviously if science cant support my life with FACT why should I live by it?
according to FACT I am not here...
and dont insult me, what did I ever do to you besides disagree?
You disagree with everyone here defending the faith, why is it so absurd that someone disagrees with you?

Last edited: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 1:58:13 PM

@Supra

Sorry but I got work to do. I will respond tomorrow. All I will say is I beleive we are talking about 2 different letters. The one I am refering to was a response to trajan's letter about how to deal with the christian menace.

@Warfare

Like I said I'm not going to continue with a discussion about your mother. You are only trying to be disruptive at this point.

Now that's funny.

Jeez...
is your skull that thick?
I am only using my mother as a friggen example but I am talking about you!
if all I am is being "disruptive" then fine
you cant/wont understand, so I wont try to make you understand
3 strikes... I'm out...

How would you know what I am trying to do?
you know nothing of me, so how would you know about my behavior tendencies?
if I was really being disruptive, shouldent an admin have silenced me by now?
you have predetermined that my discussion has no value, therefore you dismiss it

Go outside and play some football or something...
loosen up...
stop treating the other side of the debate like crap...

@ 44 Hehehe. Some people just don't get it. I can't believe how much I laugh sometimes during the day when reading and posting. I especially enjoy it when people respond with these remarks to others: You aren't intelligent You are such a loser. I feel sorry for you.

XD

@ Supratank- well said. The history is clear, and I appreciate your input.

I want a T-shirt that says "My God can beat up your god." ;)

_{Just visited one of those clever t-shirt websites.}

Last edited: Thursday, July 28, 2005 at 7:16:04 AM

LOL- With Elijah's picture on it, right?

Everybody play nice...

@Rabban,

Now I am not sure that would be a very popular shirt in the middle east..lol

More like a GIANT bullseye.. :)

Wow, I'd love to sit in on a debate between Jet Jag and Supra. This post has been highly interesting from the spectator's point of view. Thanks.

I have new respect for you Jet (which doesn't mean I agree with you) given the nasty rumors and reputation I've heard about Crow...if that is indeed an alias of yours.

Staying tuned...

-MUSC.

Since this is a reoccurring question in this thread, I figured I'd throw my 2 cents in:
(note: Jet, since this is a public forum, I may expound on things a little more than I would if I was sending it directly to you. I'm sure you already know much of this, as you clearly have studied. But I don't want to exclude others who may not have the same background, so please bear with me. :) )

You certainly don't have to go all the way to Esdras to get the impression that non-Jews are second class citizens. Jesus calls us dogs. How should we take that?

But it also seems that God loves the spittle and the dogs too, and has enough of an overflow to supply the needs of both. I'm content to be spittle relying on the character of God to redeem me if I, as this woman did above, trust in Him to do so.

The book of Hebrews explains it more, talking about being adopted into Abraham's family by faith. The book of Ruth is all about a foreigner being brought into the Jewish family and is seen as an allegory for outsiders being brought into the Jewish family by way of a redeemer. Psalms often mentions that other nations will come to Jerusalem to worship God, and the writer often speaks of salvation belonging to God, often he mentions relying on God for His salvation. It does not seem inconsistent to me that foreigners who trust in God would be included in the promise of salvation. If anything it would seem that gentile Christians might as well be called "adopted Jews" rather than "Christians." (Perhaps that would have kept the wayward ones from treating their step brothers so poorly at certain times in history. :S )

One of the main thrusts of the cross and Christ's sacrifice is that we are not able to live up to the rules (the Jewish Law) that God requires. We can try, but we will inevitably break at least one, and in order for us to be made right again in God's sight we must rely on God to make a way for us. I can read the ten commandments and quickly see that I have broken a number of them (especially if you use Jesus' standard, that if you have broken them in your heart, but not actually acted them out, you are still guilty). I'm clearly not worthy to know God. But, like the Psalmist, I trust in the mercy of God to remove my guilt and restore me. Given that, it is not hard for me to also trust in the mercy of God to adopt me into His family and save me along with the Jews.

I don't expect that convinces you of much (seeing how to trust God, you would have to first believe in God.). But it's not so much an argument, but an answer to the question "how do you over come that?" I don't over come that. I just acknowledge that I am indeed spittle, and I trust in the love and mercy of God to overcome that.

@MUSCLES©

Lol! Yes I am the dreaded Crow. Let them say what they want, I could care less what they think. I appreciate the compliment though. I too am glad some are enjoying the debate.

@all

Sorry but even I have to do some work occasionally. I'll try to respond in a day or so.

Crow/Jet

We've had our dreaded interactions, but you have been extremely civil to me as of late.

I appreciate it... And welcome the questions and conversation. It has been civil and positive.

@Supra

Hey now you are giving me a bad rep! Lol

@jet

^ LOL

I guess he finally sees what he's been missing all this time. Good thing I'm Catholic and believe in reconciliation. XD

Question to all who said love your enemy?

Come on who said love your enemies?

I thought that was a rhetorical question. Of course it was Jesus in Luke (chapter 6)

@ Rogue - Then let's reconcile.

Last edited: Friday, July 29, 2005 at 5:56:15 AM

This Thread Needs Sinfest!

YAY for strange veiws of god!

Last edited: Sunday, July 31, 2005 at 12:54:37 PM

^ Funny.

There was one more thing. I was considering some of the things Jet wrote and tried to figure out the "backstory". Just curious, are some of your younger experiences associated with the Pentacostal movement?