Sotomayor, the SBC, Land and the GOP

THOMAS: "Jesus said many, many things and I for one take Jesus at His Word, as the Trinity is One, I look at the bible as one, complimentary not contradictory.

Yet you contradict what He says.

THOMAS: "You wrote, ""Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 7:21)"

THOMAS: "If someone would say, "Lord, Lord," to Jesus, does it not seem that the aforementioned person would "believe" in Jesus?

Which Jesus, which Messiah, the One of Scripture or the one someone makes up?

"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the One who called you by the Grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel - which is really no gospel at all [just like your Good News isn't either Thomas]. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the ONE we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned." (Galatians 1:6-8)

"For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached...you put up with it easily enough." (2 Corinthians 4)

Thomas, you need to preach the Jesus of Scripture and what He says, not what you want Him to say.

THOMAS: "If you notice Jesus said, "Blessed are the poor in spirit", did He not? Jesus did not say 'Blessed are the poor in spirit that believe in me', did He?

The verse before the Sermon says,
"Large crowds from Galilee, the Decapolis, Jerusalem Judea and the region across the Jordan FOLLOWED HIM." (Matthew4:25)

But the context of 5:2 says, "and He began to teach them."

Question: Does that refer to the disciples, since they were the ones who came to Him or does that refer to the crowds, or both?

Question: Does the distinction made in verse 3, "the poor of spirit" refer to the arrogant of heart as also inheriting the kingdom? Or does the verse speak of a specific distinction?

Question: Does not other passages of Scripture make it plain that the poor in spirit are those who recognize their need of a Savior and based on His merit and what He has done for them, believe on Him, not in themselves?

Question: Do you not have to take into consideration the whole council of Scripture as to who the poor of spirit are?

As for the many passages of Scripture that speak on belief, here are a few,

""And the Father who sent Me has Himself testified concerning Me. You have never heard His voice nor seen His form, nor does His word dwell in you, FOR YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THE ONE He sent. You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you have eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about Me, yet you refuse to come to Me to have life." (John 5:37-40)

"Then they asked Him, 'What MUST we do to do the works God requires?' Jesus answered, 'The work of God is this: TO BELIEVE IN THE ONE HE HAS SENT." (John 6:28, 29)

"Whoever believes in HIM is not condemned, but whoever DOES NOT BELIEVE stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." (John 3:18)

"Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for EVERYONE WHO BELIEVES." (Romans 10:4) Please, please read the whole context of Romans 10:1-21)

THOMAS: "Then you wrote, "The reason why they are contrary is because they continually take the message out of context and insert meaning and words that do not relate to what God's written revelation says to us."

THOMAS: "Don't you mean what they "say" to you?"

Come on Thomas, language has meaning and to correctly interpret the meaning you have to take the words in the context of what they are saying. God does not go against logic when He speaks to mankind or else everyone would be taking a different meaning from the passage. The reason there is so much misinterpretation is because people take out of the text what the text and Author are not saying.

When the text says, plainly, not everyone will enter the kingdom, you say everyone will enter the kingdom. That is saying exactly the opposite of what the text says, and you cannot explain why you continually butcher God's word and make it say things that it does not say other than to offer that God has spoken to you personally and He speaks with a forked tongue, saying one thing to you and another through His written revelation. So why would I believe you over His written revelation?

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "Now, since your message contravenes what the Bible clearly teaches what can you point to as your absolute, objective reference point other than what YOU are claiming God has said to you?"

Every time I shed the light of Scripture on something you have said you side-step the issue Thomas. I ask you how you can say the things you do in light of what the Scripture plainly teaches and instead of going to the passage of Scripture you give me your personal take, not what the passage says.

What does this say Thomas?

"Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6)

Notice the language - THE way, THE truth, THE life. Do the words NO ONE mean everyone? Doe the word "except through Me[Jesus]" mean many exceptions?

When the text says, "No one comes to the Father Except through Me", you say that everyone eventually comes to God and it doesn't matter how, by Jesus or by some other way.

If we all spoke in contradictions like you do there would not be such a thing as logic or communication because everyone would derive a different meaning. So we would not know anything because no language would mean what it said in context. All dogs are cats. Green is red. When a traffic light turns red speed up, when it turns green, stop.

Hello Thomas,

You continue to make these astounding claims without anything to back them up besides your hearsay. There is no Biblical evidence at all to support your view if you take the Scriptures in context and DON'T read into them something they do not say.

THOMAS: "One day you will meet God, are you going to tell God how to be God?"

No, will you? How are you going to explain to God that you are telling people things that go contrary to His written word? You make His word out to be untrue when you do such things, but we both know that God is not a liar, but always tels the truth.

THOMAS: "See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom."

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God. Do not be deceived." (1 Corinthians 6:9)

"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you as I did before, that those who live like this WILL NOT inherit the kingdom of God." (Galatians 5:19-21)

"Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life." (Galatians 6:7-8)

"In reply Jesus declared, 'I tell you the truth, NO ONE can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again...NO ONE can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit." (John 3:3, 5b)

What is not plain to you about what God is saying to us? No one means that - no one. It depends on God's grace and mercy, not on you or I.

"For it is by GRACE you have been saved, through faith - and not from yourselves, it is the gift of God [did you get that Thomas, it is not in your ability to save yourself, not by your works, not by your righteousness, not by anything you can do] - not by works, so that no one can boast." (Ephesians 2:8)

THOMAS: "It is God's Will that ALL be saved and God's Will, will be done."

"When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord, and ALL who were APPOINTED FOR ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED." (Acts 13:48)

Notice it does not say everyone, but all that were appointed.

"And we know that in all things God works for the good of THOSE who love Him, who have been CALLED ACCORDING TO HIS PURPOSE." (Romans 8:28)

"What if God, choosing to show His WRATH and make His power known, bore with great patience the objects of His wrath - prepared FOR DESTRUCTION." (Romans 9:22)

peterhuff

One day you will meet God, are you going to tell God how to be God?

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom.

It is God's Will that ALL be saved and God's Will, will be done.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You wrote, "Thomas, you relate everything to the "experience" you had with God while ignoring His message, His written revelation to us, which is the Bible."

I look at the bible in the Light of meeting God and I trust and believe what Jesus told us when He said, "I will send the Holy Spirit to guide you..."

Then you wrote, "Lots of people have had revelations from "God""

That's fine and it is of no concern to me because any "Revelation" from God to someone else is God's Business not mine, God's revealing Himself to me is of concern to both God and me.

Then you wrote, "The reason why they are contrary is because they continually take the message out of context and insert meaning and words that do not relate to what God's written revelation says to us."

Don't you mean what they "say" to you?

You then wrote, "Now, since your message contravenes what the Bible clearly teaches what can you point to as your absolute, objective reference point other than what YOU are claiming God has said to you?"

When God the Father came into my heart, He did not say a word, He did not have to; when God the Holy Spirit came into my body, He did not say a word either but He did reveal to me that the Catholic Eucharist is Jesus.

In two separate dreams, God spoke to me either directly or thru a "representative" one was to tell me "Only I could say it" and the other was "This is for you and for you alone".

The prodigal son speaks because I was chosen by God, I did not choose myself.

You then wrote, "God has confirmed His messengers in many ways throughout the Bible,"

Don't worry, God will in His Time and in His Way.

I have never told anyone to follow me but I have said that Jesus's Invitation was to "Come follow Me", "Me" meaning Jesus, not the bible, not the Church, not even His Teachings, these can all be helpful but Jesus's Invitation was to follow Him.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You mentioned the Sermon on the mount contained in Mat 5:3..."3 ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." and so on.

If you notice Jesus said, "Blessed are the poor in spirit", did He not? Jesus did not say 'Blessed are the poor in spirit that believe in me', did He?

Jesus said many, many things and I for one take Jesus at His Word, as the Trinity is One, I look at the bible as one, complimentary not contradictory.

You wrote, ""Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 7:21)"

If someone would say, "Lord, Lord," to Jesus, does it not seem that the aforementioned person would "believe" in Jesus?

As I have said, I look past heaven to the Kingdom of God, the new heavens and the new earth.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

PETERHUFF

You wrote, "Now, if I break a law and another steps in my place and without obligation pays my penalty, is that not mercy?"

Isn't this what Jesus called us to do? Isn't this what being a "Christian" is all about? Jesus did not ask us to step forward and receive a "get out of hell" card free, did He?

Then, "If God chooses not to pay the penalty of every person who has done Him wrong, but show His justice, is He not perfectly right and just in doing so?"

Sounds kind of arbitrary to me, I thought that God gave us the choice of accepting or not, so in other words, you are saying that we have no choice in the matter at all, aren't you? What you are saying is you did not accept God's Gift because you had absolutely no say in the matter, aren't you?

Then, "We are getting what we deserve."

Didn't you say that we all deserved it?

You then wrote, "Grace is God's unmerited favor. If we were all given that favor then it would not be grace for we would all merit it as something owned to us."

Have you ever thought that God is not as "stingy" with "His Grace" as you may think?

Just because God can and will spread "His Grace" to all does not add up to it being "owed to us" as you so conveniently twisted, it just might mean that God is NOT BOUND BY YOU AND YOUR PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS and that God just might be "more merciful" than, sad to say, some think and, even sadder to say, that some want.

You then wrote, "We could do whatever we like without consequence."

If you actually read what I write, I have never said that, quite the contrary, I have said that we are responsible for how we use our free will and I have also said that God looks at the person, not the "label".

You then wrote, "Why is man not grateful but continually shuns God by worshiping things that do not deserve worship, like false gods?"

Why are some so interested in their own salvation that they don't seem to care about the rest of humanity?

God cares about ALL OF HIS CREATION and God cared enough to have His Plan even before Creation itself.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

THOMAS: "I happened to go to Mass this morning and one of the readings was about the two apostles that wanted the "best seats in the house", so to speak, shouldn't we be "hoping" that everyone gets a "seat" rather than getting the "best one"?"

Yes, we should be hoping and the only way that this will happen is that the truth of the gospel is proclaimed, not a false message. All a false message will do is lead a person further from the truth.

THOMAS: "As I have said, God's Plan is inclusive and will come to Fruition."

God's plan is inclusive in that it includes "people from every tribe and language and people and nation." (Revelation 5:9)

It is also exclusive for only those who have the Son have life, all others are under the wrath of God, the anger of His judgment on all wrongdoing or sin.

THOMAS: "Do you think that "Christianity" is to "brag" about knowing God's Name or as part of God's Plan for All of Creation."

Yes, both, and by all I do not mean every person without exception [ universal redemption], but every type of person without distinction - i.e., rich and poor, free and servants, men and women, of every tribe and nation and language.

In bragging about His name, it is His name Jesus that saves.

"Some trust in chariots and some in horses; but we trust in the name of the LORD, our God." (Psalm 20:7)

Do you see how your message keeps contradicting God's word? Do you have ears to hear?

No, God's name is Elohim signifying the plurality of God; His name is El Elyon, the Lord Most High, the sovereign ruler of the universe; El Roi, the God who sees all things, both just and unjust; El Shaddai, He who is the all sufficient One in that all things are made by Him and hold together by Him and He is without need of anything; Adonai, Lord of all and all under His Lordship when He judges the living and the dead; Jehovah-jireh, Jehovah-nissi, Jehovah-rapha and Jehovah-sabaoth, the Lord of Hosts to name some of His names.

THOMAS: "It is written, "Repent and believe in the 'Good News'", if one repents and doesn't even know about the "Good News" because of the vile, bitter, hateful, revengeful things spoken "supposedly" about God then how could they possibly "believe in the Good News"?"

First of all, because there is only One who has lived without wrongful actions or sin against God and that is Christ Jesus. So there is no other means given men under heaven by which they MUST be saved, as per Acts 4:12. Trusting in your own means does not qualify you before God's perfect justice.

Second, is the reason I have stated in the last post. God would not be just if everyone who breaks the law is declared innocent. There would be no need of anyone to live rightfully before God if everyone was going to be forgiven anyway, there would be no need of a Savior, for there would be no penalty for sin and the GLORY, the purity, the righteousness that is God would be compromised.

The reason it is "Good News" is that those who receive it by His grace through faith, do not deserve this mercy that He shows some. God shows His love towards us in His Son and in faith in His Son. Those who have the Son have life, and those who do not already stand condemned before God because they have believed in something that is not sufficient to give them life.

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "God only forgives in Christ Jesus, there is no other way, so that there is no human boasting involved. "Look what I did, aren't I good!""

THOMAS: "Seems to me if someone is expressing sorrow for their wrongdoing, they are not exclaiming, "Look what I did, aren't I good", are they?"

Sure they can boast. "Lord, I thank you that I am not like those other men who are not sorrowful, but I, Lord, have realized that I have sinned against you and I'm sorry." Am I not comparing my ability to that of others and saying "Look at me and see how sorrowful I am, not like those others?

"Lord, I am sorry that I have sinned against you and I will do everything in my power to make it right." "Look at how sorry I am. I will do anything that I can to make it right." Is that not relying on your own ability to save yourself, rather than on One who has perfect ability to save because only He has lived fully righteous before God?

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "When it says no one can come to the Father except through Jesus, you say that if a person does not know Jesus but is sorrowful for their sins then God forgives them."

THOMAS: "Of course, Jesus died for our sins, did He not?"

According to Scripture He died for the sins of His people, for those BELIEVING in Him as the means of reconciliation with God, the one Mediator between man and God. If a man does not believe he is condemned already, because he shows contempt for God's only righteous means by which a person can be justified before God.

THOMAS: "If a person does not know Jesus, how could one possibly go to Him and thank Him. Your "idea" of God is of an absolute tyrant, an egomaniac that a mere human could not even imagine. God is nowhere even close to being "petty" as you conceive God to be."

I do not conceive of God to be "petty." I conceive Him of being loving and merciful, but also JUST.

If you are guilty of idolatry, do you not deserve to be punished? What is unjust about that? If you break a human law and are arrested for doing so, do you not deserve punishment?

Now, if I break a law and another steps in my place and without obligation pays my penalty, is that not mercy? If God chooses not to pay the penalty of every person who has done Him wrong, but show His justice, is He not perfectly right and just in doing so? We are getting what we deserve.

Grace is God's unmerited favor. If we were all given that favor then it would not be grace for we would all merit it as something owned to us. We could do whatever we like without consequence.
God has made the consequences of sin known since the beginning, when He created the first man and first woman. No, God owes no man anything; we owe God all things - our life our breathe, our food, our all. Why is man not grateful but continually shuns God by worshiping things that do not deserve worship, like false gods?

THOMAS: "You wrote, "You do the same thing that Adam and Eve did in the Garden; you doubt His word of truth. "Did God really say?" "Can we really trust that the Bible is God's word?""

THOMAS: "If you remember, when satan tempted Jesus, satan quoted verbatim from the bible, did he not?"

Actually he left out, "to guard you in all your ways".

THOMAS: "Many people "quote" the bible to justify themself. No one, including satan, will stop me from completing the "job" that God has given to me because God will see me thru."

You're right, many people quote or should I say misquote.

But what is our authority in checking out what people say about a quote or proclamation? Is it not God's word? If every Thomas, Dick and Harry are proclaiming a different message, all claiming to speak from God who do you refer to; to which standard do you believe? Which one has the ultimate reference when all are saying something different? You are not the first person this century believing he is a messenger from God.

THOMAS: "Who said that I have any "authority"? I haven't. I have said that I have a "job" to do."

You either speak as one who has authority or your message has no credence to it.

Any message from God has authority. If your message comes from God it would have authority.

THOMAS: "I guess one could say that I went "past the bible" because I went to God and admitted that I am guilty. I guess one could say that I put my faith in God rather than in the bible."

The faith we are under is revealed to us by His word and by His Spirit confirming that word in our lives. We would not understand in whom Christ is unless someone came to us preaching about Christ. (Romans 10:17) Without God's written revelation anyone can pass himself off with any message. There is no standard without His written revelation to test any truth claim. Why should I put my trust in what you say Thomas?

I know that God is not a God of confusion but always speaks what is true and right. He doesn't say yes when He means not or contravene logic by saying one thing and yet meaning something that is totally opposite.

So when a messenger comes along that seem to be speaking contrary to God we have His Word to check the message. In that way we do not accept a false message. The apostle Paul gave warning of this to the church at Corinth,

"But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, YOU PUT UP WITH IT EASILY ENOUGH." (2 Corinthians 11:3-4)

But look what Paul says,

"And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want to be considered EQUAL with us in the things they boast about [such as God choosing you as His messenger all the while preaching a different message] For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ...It is not surprising, then, if his [Satan's] servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve." (2 Corinthians 11:12,13, 15)

So I call upon you again to turn to Christ in repentance and trust alone in Him to save you and rely upon the Spirit of Truth to guide you into the truth, the truth of the living Word, the truth of God's written word, the truth of a God who cannot lie. May God be gracious to you and truly give you ears to hear and eyes to see and a heart to believe that you may be led by the Spirit of truth. That is my hope in Christ Jesus!

Thomas, you relate everything to the "experience" you had with God while ignoring His message, His written revelation to us, which is the Bible. Lots of people have had revelations from "God" such as Jimmy Jones and David Koresh and a myriad of others who all proclaim messages that are contrary to the Bible. The reason why they are contrary is because they continually take the message out of context and insert meaning and words that do not relate to what God's written revelation says to us. Language has meaning and God is most capable and apt of conveying what He means.

Now, since your message contravenes what the Bible clearly teaches what can you point to as your absolute, objective reference point other than what YOU are claiming God has said to you? You don't have a written revelation from God so what you are saying is just on your hearsay. There is no way to verify it, unless of course you believe that the Bible is God's reference to us in times of dispute. Is that the case, or do you just want people to believe or disbelieve you because YOU believe you are a messenger of God, period? Anyone can claim to be a messenger used by God.

God has confirmed His messengers in many ways throughout the Bible, including through signs and miracles or wonders, but what they [the messengers] have said has been consistent with His previous revelations. Yours has not.

Jesus spoke as One who has authority. You do not and by the word of God as the Christian's authority and by the guidance of the Holy Spirit you do not come across as a credible witness. You keep snatching these passages of Scripture out of thin air all the while ignoring the context of the passage to prove your points. At times you say the opposite of what the Scripture does. When I quote a passage to question the authority of what you say, you do what the Jehovah's Witnesses do, you ignore the context and immediately switch gears to a new context to prove your point, or you just provide idol speculation which has been revealed to you by your source, which you say is God, but if it be God, there is no way of checking the credibility of your claims. They go counter to God's other revelations.

Continuing Thoma,

THOMAS: "Didn't Jesus tell us not to worry?"

You take everything out of context Thomas. He is teaching His disciples and those who would follow Him. (Matthew 5:1, 2) The whole context of the Sermon on the Mount is about that trust in God through Christ.

Christians do not have a righteousness of their own but it is on the righteousness of Christ Jesus the Lord that we stand. (Matthew 5:20, 6:33; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Galatians 2:21; Phil. 3:9 etc.)

"God made Him who had no sin to be sin for us [please read the context to see who the "us" is referring to], so that IN HIM we might become the righteousness of God." (2 Corinthians 5:21)

THOMAS: "I have mentioned that hell and spiritual death are both real but that Jesus has won the keys to both and will use them in due time, God's Time."

Christ Jesus has won the victory, but only for those who believe in Him.

"But the cowardly, the UNBELIEVING, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters [ those who worship false gods instead of the one true and living God] and all liars - their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." (Revelation 21:8)

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God [so much for your theory Thomas of everyone in the kingdom]. Do not be deceived [here is the qualifier]: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes not homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were [who is the "you" referring to Thomas?]. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified IN the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-11) The you is the church of God in Corinth and those everywhere who call on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ (see Ch. 1:2)

Those who do not trust in Christ have not been cleansed by His blood sacrifice, the sacrifice of His life in their stead, because, as is the teaching throughout the Bible, God requires a sacrifice for wrong doing, a payment that is costly for sin, and that is the life of the guilty party.

"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life IN Christ Jesus OUR Lord." (Romans 6:23)

Thomas, not all will enter the kingdom of God. Jesus made that plain in the Sermon on the Mount.

"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 7:21)

Again, please read the context.

Hello Thomas,

THOMAS: "You wrote, "Because truth is important and you paint a message that says, "see you ALL in the kingdom. Sit back and relax, don't worry, God is love, be happy!""

THOMAS: "And the truth is that God Wins, God's Plan is for All, God's Plan truly will be seen as "GOOD NEWS"."

Yes, God has won. The victory is IN Christ Jesus, but it is appointed for man to live once and then the Judgment. THAT is the Good News! Those believing in the Son have life and those not believing have already been condemned. Your message is counter to God's revelation because it ignores the ONLY means by which a person may be made right and in good standing before God is by trusting in Jesus Christ IN THIS LIFETIME. Once you pass beyond this life without Christ you stand condemned already.

"Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and He will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who ARE WAITING for Him." (Hebrews 9:27, 28)

There is always a distinction made in the Bible and especially the New Testament between believers and unbelievers, between the sheep and goats, the righteous and unrighteous, the saved and lost. This is a distinction you would do well to pay attention to Thomas, instead of preaching a different gospel.

"Therefore there is now no condemnation FOR THOSE who are IN Christ Jesus,..." (Romans 8:1)

"Whoever believes IN HIM is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." (John 3:18)

"Jesus answered, 'I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in My Father's name speak for Me, but you do not believe because YOU ARE NOT MY SHEEP. My sheep listen to My voice: I know them, and they follow Me. I give THEM eternal life, and THEY shall never perish; no one can snatch THEM out of My hand. My Father who has given THEM to Me, is greater than all; no one can snatch THEM out of My Father's hand. I and the Father are one." (John 10:25-30)

Read John 6:35-44 again and pay particular attention to the wording. It is all that the Father gives the Son that come to Him and only those. The Son loses none of those.

If you pass out of this life trusting in your own merits before God then on those merits you stand and are judged, not on the merits of Jesus Christ. There is an eternal difference.

Sorry Thomas, I don't have any time tonight or tomorrow to chat.

Peter

peterhuff

You wrote, "Because truth is important and you paint a message that says, "see you ALL in the kingdom. Sit back and relax, don't worry, God is love, be happy!""

And the truth is that God Wins, God's Plan is for All, God's Plan truly will be seen as "GOOD NEWS".

Didn't Jesus tell us not to worry?

I have mentioned that the seventh day, the new heavens and the new earth will arrive and I have also pointed out that the night of the sixth day shall precede it.

I have mentioned that hell and spiritual death are both real but that Jesus has won the keys to both and will use them in due time, God's Time.

I have mentioned the obvious that the world is a mess even tho some refuse to see the obvious.

And I have also mentioned that some not only settle for the 'good enough news' but seem to be "rooting for it" with the 'good enough news' being 'as long as I get to the 'good place'', rather than the "GOOD NEWS" which is for ALL to be in the Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth with the coming of the seventh day.

It is referred to as "the mysterious plan of God" and as some may have noticed in the bible, God sends a messenger or messengers at times of His Choosing.

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You wrote, "Love is not all He is Thomas, He is also just and good and holy and pure. These are words that we use to describe what Gos is like, as He himself has described Himself to us in His Word. It is just a way of expressing in language who God is."

I know that you do not understand it or know it and I am not saying that I understand it but I am saying that I know: God is Love.

All of the words that you are saying is just trying to describe "attributes" and I am not knocking it but what I am saying is GOD IS LOVE.

It is that simple.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

persiflage

Thank you so much for your comments and I do truly believe that we are to encourage one another.

Hope you are doing fine.

As I have said, God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof.

I have also said that God is a Trinity and a Being of Pure Love.

Even if one does not know God, God still knows that person and cares for that person and God has let it be known that we are to care for each other.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You wrote, "You do the same thing that Adam and Eve did in the Garden; you doubt His word of truth. "Did God really say?" "Can we really trust that the Bible is God's word?""

If you remember, when satan tempted Jesus, satan quoted verbatim from the bible, did he not?

Many people "quote" the bible to justify themself. No one, including satan, will stop me from completing the "job" that God has given to me because God will see me thru.

You then wrote, "What you do when you do such things Thomas is you put yourself and your authority above the word of God so that, for now, you judge it, not as it really does in judging you."

Who said that I have any "authority"? I haven't. I have said that I have a "job" to do.

I guess one could say that I went "past the bible" because I went to God and admitted that I am guilty. I guess one could say that I put my faith in God rather than in the bible.

You then wrote, "When it says no one can come to the Father except through Jesus, you say that if a person does not know Jesus but is sorrowful for their sins then God forgives them."

Of course, Jesus died for our sins, did He not?

If a person does not know Jesus, how could one possibly go to Him and thank Him. Your "idea" of God is of an absolute tyrant, an egomaniac that a mere human could not even imagine. God is nowhere even close to being "petty" as you conceive God to be.

It is written, "Repent and believe in the 'Good News'", if one repents and doesn't even know about the "Good News" because of the vile, bitter, hateful, revengeful things spoken "supposedly" about God then how could they possibly "believe in the Good News"?

You then wrote, "God only forgives in Christ Jesus, there is no other way, so that there is no human boasting involved. "Look what I did, aren't I good!""

Seems to me if someone is expressing sorrow for their wrongdoing, they are not exclaiming, "Look what I did, aren't I good", are they?

I happened to go to Mass this morning and one of the readings was about the two apostles that wanted the "best seats in the house", so to speak, shouldn't we be "hoping" that everyone gets a "seat" rather than getting the "best one"?

As I have said, God's Plan is inclusive and will come to Fruition.

Do you think that "Christianity" is to "brag" about knowing God's Name or as part of God's Plan for All of Creation.

God has had His Plan since before Creation and God's Plan Will come to Fruition.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Finally Thomas,

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "If we didn't have them [the Bible, His Word, the Scriptures]then anyone could claim a revelation from God, each revelation being contrary to the next, so logically truth could never be known."

THOMAS: "Why should anyone else's "revelation" bother you?"

Because truth is important and you paint a message that says, "see you ALL in the kingdom. Sit back and relax, don't worry, God is love, be happy!"

THOMAS: "God revealing Himself to me means that instead of believing that God Is Real, I know that God is Real."

Yes, God is real, and so is His Word. What He says is true. His word is light, truth, wisdom, loving, but He will also judge by using it, and those not found in Christ Jesus will not be saved from His wrath, His justice against sin. Yes, God is merciful and that mercy is given to us only in the Son. In Him, the Son, we have life!

THOMAS: "I have not said that God revealed any "new revelation" to me, on the contrary, I have said that many of God's Revelations have not come about yet."

You do so by your words as the contract what God says in His word.

Good night! 6am comes early.

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "The check against false teaching and false prophets are the Scriptures."

THOMAS: "In the scriptures, Jesus said, "They have ears but do not hear, they have eyes but do not see"."

And why was that Thomas? Because they did not believe who He was or what He said. The apostle Peter said "we did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty." (2 Peter 1:16) The same is true today. Many view the word of God as myth. They, like you, place their authority above that of Scripture.

THOMAS: "Even tho I have met God, I do not even pretend to know what absolutely everything in the bible means and not only do I not know what everything means, I also don't need to know."

You need to know what God says so that you do not fall further into the trap of proclaiming things that are contrary to the Word of God.

THOMAS: "I am counting on God to let me know, what I need to know, when I need to know it, so that I can do the "job" God has chosen for me."

Then listen to His word.

"My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you, turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding, and if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and if you look for it like silver and search for it as hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God. For the LORD gives wisdom, and from His mouth come knowledge and understanding. He holds victory in store for the upright, He is a shield to those whose walk is blameless, for He guards the course of the just and protects the way of His faithful ones. Then you will understand what is right and just and fair - every good path. For wisdom will enter your heart, and knowledge will be pleasant to your soul. Discretion will protect you, and understanding will guard you. Wisdom will save you from the ways of wicked men, from those whose words are perverse, who leave the straight paths to walk in dark ways, who delight in doing wrong and rejoice in the perverseness of evil, whose paths are crooked and who are devious in their ways." (Proverbs 2:1-15)

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "You do not need to make Him known to Me, Jesus the Son has already, through His Spirit and by His word. You keep revealing another Jesus."

THOMAS: "This may sound like semantics to you but Jesus did not say that He would send His Spirit, what He said was I will send the Holy Spirit, God is a Trinity."

I am aware of the distinction between the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of Christ. We are in Christ, in union with Father, Son and Holy Spirit, for God is Spirit, and God is in us in the presence of the Holy Spirit.

"You however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the SPIRIT OF CHRIST, he does not belong to Christ. But if Christ is IN YOU, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. And if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead is alive in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit, who lives in you." Romans 8:9-11)

"My prayer is not for them alone. I prayer also for those who believe in Me through their message [notice He did not say the message of Thomas Baum], that all of them may be one, Father, just as You are IN Me and I am in You. May they also be IN US so that the world may believe that You sent Me. I have given them the glory that you gave Me, that they may be one as We are one: I IN THEM and You in Me. May they be bought to complete unity to let the world know that You have sent Me and have loved them even as You have loved Me. Father, I want those You have given Me [notice the distinction - those You have given Me - not everyone in the world as Jesus Himself points out previously in vs. 9. Notice also that the world hates them because Jesus gave them His Father's Word] to be with Me where I am, and to see My glory, the glory You have given Me before the creation of this world. Righteous Father, though the world does not know You, I know You, and they know that You have sent Me. I have made You known to them, and will continue to make You known in order that the love You have for Me may be in them and that I MYSELF MAY BE IN THEM." (John 17:20-26)

I also affirm that the Holy Spirit is in all believers.

Continuing Thomas,

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "So please do not tell me that Jesus was not a representative. You do not know the word of God when you make such claims."

THOMAS: "I guess one could say that Jesus was a representative since He became One of us but as I pointed out, God Himself came. To say that Jesus was only a "representative" is to say that "Christianity" is a total fraud. God becoming One of us is the whole core of "Christianity", it is not about religion or morality but about the unfolding of God's Plan which is for ALL OF HUMANITY to be in the Kingdom.

So you have changed your tune. Now you are retracting what you said earlier about Jesus not being a representative, now you say He is.

Second, I never said the Jesus was "just" a representative" for I believe He is fully God as well as becoming fully man. He is the Second Adam in that He, as a human being, lived a life here on earth as a human being, not using His deity, but on His humanity so that He could be a perfect human representative before God for us. In that way He could "bear our iniquities", suffer our punishment of judgment and satisfy the wrath or anger of God against wrong doing. A human, the first Adam brought sin into this world, and by sin death, just as Jesus Christ, the Second Adam, by His perfect life of obedience bought life and freedom from sin only for those who believe in Him. The rest are already condemned.

THOMAS: "Remember the question posed by Jesus, "Who do you say that I AM"? It is just as valid today as it was when first posed."

I realize that and do not dispute it. I do not deny that Jesus is God. How could I and be a Christian?

THOMAS: "I am not "focusing exclusively on His Love", I have stated it very simply and straight-forwardly that Love is NOT an attribute of God but is God's Very Being. Big difference.

Love is not all He is Thomas, He is also just and good and holy and pure. These are words that we use to describe what Gos is like, as He himself has described Himself to us in His Word. It is just a way of expressing in language who God is.

Evening Thomas,

THOMAS: "It doesn't exactly say that "belief in Jesus alone" gets one to the 'good place', does it?"

That depends on how you view the words "No one comes to the Father except through Me" or "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved" or "God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son that whoever believes in Him [i.e. Jesus] shall not perish but have eternal life...Who ever believes is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son [i.e. Jesus]" or "And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all...because by one sacrifice He has made perfect forever those who are being made holy."

As you have quoted John 8:24, it matters what you believe about Jesus.

There is a continuing contrast between believers and unbelievers, between salvation and judgment, between our own merits and the merits of Christ Jesus, and an emphasis on the one way to the Father, heaven, salvation, sanctification, etc.

So when you say it doesn't exactly say "belief in Jesus alone" you deny what the Scriptures actually say; that is belief in Jesus as the only way, belief that He alone has paid the penalty for our sins, belief that Jesus alone has the merit of a perfect life lived before the Father as a human being, for when He became flesh He lived a life before the Father as a man without sin, belief that Jesus alone is the one Mediator between God and man, belief that if we do not believe in who He claimed to be we will indeed die in our sins, and the list goes on.

You do the same thing that Adam and Eve did in the Garden; you doubt His word of truth. "Did God really say?" "Can we really trust that the Bible is God's word?"

What you do when you do such things Thomas is you put yourself and your authority above the word of God so that, for now, you judge it, not as it really does in judging you. You place the authority of what you are saying above the authority of the Word of God. When it says no one can come to the Father except through Jesus, you say that if a person does not know Jesus but is sorrowful for their sins then God forgives them.

God only forgives in Christ Jesus, there is no other way, so that there is no human boasting involved. "Look what I did, aren't I good!"

The whole Bible points toward the Lord Jesus Christ. Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness." (Romans 4:3) He looked ahead to Christ, just as all the Old Testament saints did. "Moses regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward." (Hebrews 11:26)

We are reminded to fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith.

peterhuff

You wrote, "Yes He is love. He is also good, He is also just. You want to ignore His goodness and justice when you focus exclusively on His love. He reminds us throughout His word of the other qualities of His character, such as justice and goodness."

God is not a Being of Good, God is not a Being of Justice, God is a Being of Love.

I am not "focusing exclusively on His Love", I have stated it very simply and straight-forwardly that Love is NOT an attribute of God but is God's Very Being. Big difference.

You then wrote, "You do not need to make Him known to Me, Jesus the Son has already, through His Spirit and by His word. You keep revealing another Jesus."

This may sound like semantics to you but Jesus did not say that He would send His Spirit, what He said was I will send the Holy Spirit, God is a Trinity.

You then wrote, "The check against false teaching and false prophets are the Scriptures."

In the scriptures, Jesus said, "They have ears but do not hear, they have eyes but do not see".

Even tho I have met God, I do not even pretend to know what absolutely everything in the bible means and not only do I not know what everything means, I also don't need to know.

I am counting on God to let me know, what I need to know, when I need to know it, so that I can do the "job" God has chosen for me.

You then wrote, "If we didn't have them then anyone could claim a revelation from God, each revelation being contrary to the next, so logically truth could never be known."

Why should anyone else's "revelation" bother you?

God revealing Himself to me means that instead of believing that God Is Real, I know that God is Real.

I have not said that God revealed any "new revelation" to me, on the contrary, I have said that many of God's Revelations have not come about yet.

I have also said that many thru the ages and into this present day have twisted what is written so badly that this could have something to do with the revelation about Jesus vomiting some out of His Mouth.

Just as the Trinity is One, I look at the bible as one book with quite a few chapters.

If God does not care for His entire Creation, then He must not care for any of it. This is why God has a Plan which is inclusive.

God became One of us and cared enough to die for us and asked us to follow in His Footsteps, seems pretty obvious that He asked us to die for others, doesn't it?

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You wrote, "You have to know the history of the Old Testament to know that the priests represented the people before God.

It seems pretty apparent that one does not need to "know the history of the Old Testament" to be chosen by God to be a messenger.

You then wrote, "We do not need a Roman Catholic priest to represent us before God. Jesus already has!"

I have never said that one does, what is the point of this statement?

I have said that the Catholic Eucharist is Jesus and that the Holy Spirit revealed this to me.

Jesus never lived in a vacumn back then and we do not either. There have been Roman Catholic Priests that have been very helpful in my life, the Sacraments of the Catholic Church have been very helpful in my life and there have been many other people from all walks of life that have been very helpful.

I have met people that I do not have a clue whether they believe in God or not, belong to a "religion" or not, have no idea what "label" either they or someone else applies or don't apply to themself, yet have been more "Christian" in their hearts, shown by their actions than some that apply the "Christian" label to themself.

As I have mentioned before, I have, at times, seen more "Christian" activity, so to speak, in bars than in Church.

If Love shines thru then God is shining thru.

You then wrote, "One mediator Thomas. A mediator is someone who represents someone in front of someone else."

Something to think about: Since Jesus is The Mediator between Dad and ..., shouldn't "Christians" be the mediator between our Brother and... ?

You then wrote, "You need to repent of such actions Thomas."

What I need to do is follow the Will of God for my life not listen to others to tell me what "in their opinion" is God's Will for me.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You wrote, "You only reveal half of what God has said about Himself. Yes He is love, but He is also just and will not compromise His justice for then He would not be good."

You seem to have quite a "warped sense of justice", have you ever heard of "Mercy"?

You then wrote, "So why do we need you as a prophet Thomas? We have Jesus, the greatest prophet, priest and king! Do you think that God needs you to speak to others a different message than what His Son and the apostles have already delivered?"

First, check out Revelation.

Second, if we look at Jesus as merely a prophet, even the greatest prophet, rather than God-Incarnate, we are totally misled.

Third, I am not giving a "different message", I am merely pointing out that the "Good News" really is "Good News for all people", not just 'good enough news for some.

Fourth, as far as "God needing me to speak", you can take that up with God, He is the One that chose me.

You then wrote, "Yes, He is God, (not just was) but He also became man in order to fulfill all of God's righteous standards and obtain salvation for those who would believe in Him. (Philippians 2:6-8) Now that is a different topic. "

It doesn't exactly say that "belief in Jesus alone" gets one to the 'good place', does it?

You then wrote, "So please do not tell me that Jesus was not a representative. You do not know the word of God when you make such claims."

I guess one could say that Jesus was a representative since He became One of us but as I pointed out, God Himself came. To say that Jesus was only a "representative" is to say that "Christianity" is a total fraud. God becoming One of us is the whole core of "Christianity", it is not about religion or morality but about the unfolding of God's Plan which is for ALL OF HUMANITY to be in the Kingdom.

Remember the question posed by Jesus, "Who do you say that I AM"? It is just as valid today as it was when first posed.

Do you realize that Jesus was not the Son of God and was not the Son of Man before Mary said YES? Before that He was the Second Person of the Trinity, to put it into earthly language.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Thomas Baum,

A word of support. Your view of God is credible because of your own inner experiences. Inner experience is the essential thing, and the very thing that Peter Huff lacks.

In my view, this discussion that the two of you are having is exactly the difference between knowledge and faith. The esoteric part of religion vs the exoteric faith of the masses of believers.

While my inner experiences are not the same as yours, your experiences deserve respect. Interpretations and sources/motivations for spiritual experiences may differ......

Theology and the tenets of religion without knowledge proves nothing, and is completely unsupported outside of faith and belief.

Unfortunately, Peter Huff doesn't see the difference between the two conditions - one with real knowledge based on personal experience, and one without.

regards, Persiflage

Thomas, I do not have time tonight to answer the rest of your distortions. Sorry. Take care!

Peter

Part Three to Thomas,

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "You Thomas Moses Baum do not speak for God when you say what is oppose to His word."

THOMAS: "Do you know what "His word" is?"

He has given us a written revelation of who He is and His dealings with mankind from the beginning of His creation. And His Holy Spirit confirms that His word is true and brings to mind His word in replying to unbelief and distorted teachings.

THOMAS: ""His word" is LOVE. "His word" is God."

Yes He is love. He is also good, He is also just. You want to ignore His goodness and justice when you focus exclusively on His love. He reminds us throughout His word of the other qualities of His character, such as justice and goodness.

Psalm 9:16The Lord is known by His justice..."

Deuteronomy 32:4: "...and all His ways are just."

Genesis 18:25: Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?"

THOMAS: "Remember, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God" and that "Word" is LOVE."

And "The word became flesh and made His dwelling among us...No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only who is at the Father's side, has made Him known." (John 1:14, 18)

You do not need to make Him known to Me, Jesus the Son has already, through His Spirit and by His word. You keep revealing another Jesus. A Jesus that is contrary to the Scriptures. The check against false teaching and false prophets are the Scriptures. If we didn't have them then anyone could claim a revelation from God, each revelation being contrary to the next, so logically truth could never be known. Everything would be relative, as it is in the world of unbelief.

Part Two to Thomas,

"So Christ also did not take upon Himself the glory of becoming a high priest...During the days of Jesus' life on earth, He offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the One who could save Him from death, and He was heard because of His reverent submission...and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek. (Hebrews 5:5, 7, 9b)

You have to know the history of the Old Testament to know that the priests represented the people before God.

"Now there have been many of these priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office, but because Jesus lives forever, He has a permanent priesthood. Therefore He is able to save completely those who come t God through Him, because He always lives to intercede for them. Such a high priest meets our need - one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart for sinners, exalted above the heavens. Unlike the other high priests [Roman Catholic ones too], He does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed once for all when He offered Himself." (Hebrews 7:23-27)

We do not need a Roman Catholic priest to represent us before God. Jesus already has!

"For there is one God and ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all men - the testimony given at its proper time." (1 Timothy 2:5-6)

One mediator Thomas. A mediator is someone who represents someone in front of someone else.

John 17 is one of Jesus' priestly prayer on behalf of believers, so please do not tell me that He was not a representative before God on our behalf, because you distort the word of God and cast a shadow on what He says. You need to repent of such actions Thomas.

Hello Thomas,

THOMAS: "You wrote, "Remember also that Paul, used by God and filled with the Spirit, said to Timothy to study to show himself approved a workman who correctly handles the word of truth. (Timothy 2:15)"

THOMAS: "Paul did not choose me, God did."

Since all Scripture is "God breathed" and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16) when you say something opposite to what God has breathed or spoken it shows the inconsistency of your message. His word is a lamp unto our feet, it lights the way and exposes error. You change it to suit your message. You only reveal half of what God has said about Himself. Yes He is love, but He is also just and will not compromise His justice for then He would not be good.

Another thing, why do we need another prophet Thomas?

"In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in different ways, but in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things and through whom He made the universe." (Hebrews 1:1-2)

So why do we need you as a prophet Thomas? We have Jesus, the greatest prophet, priest and king! Do you think that God needs you to speak to others a different message than what His Son and the apostles have already delivered?

THOMAS: "You wrote, "In Deuternomy 18:17-22 (esp. vs. 20-22)God spoke the the Israelites about a prophet He would send and about false prophets and how to distinguish the difference. Jesus was the prophet, priest and King."

THOMAS: "Jesus was not a "representative" of God, Jesus was God Himself, becoming One of us to speak to us face to face."

Yes, He is God, (not just was) but He also became man in order to fulfill all of God's righteous standards and obtain salvation for those who would believe in Him. (Philippians 2:6-8) Now that is a different topic.

Every high priest is selected among men and is appointed to REPRESENT them in matters related to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sin...No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God, just as Aaron was. So Christ also did not take upon Himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to Him, "You are My Son, today I have become Your Father."
And He says in another place, "You are A PRIEST forever, in the order of Melchizedek." (Hebrews 5:1-5)

So please do not tell me that Jesus was not a representative. You do not know the word of God when you make such claims.

onofrio

Thank you so very much for your post.

I hope that you are doing fine.

God bless you too and God bless ALL OF CREATION which is God's intent, remember on the seventh day, God Blest, Rested and Made Holy, the seventh day, the new heavens and the new earth.

The seventh day will get here, exactly when I do not know but as we have been told, the night of the sixth day will precede it.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You wrote, "Remember also that Paul, used by God and filled with the Spirit, said to Timothy to study to show himself approved a workman who correctly handles the word of truth. (Timothy 2:15)"

Paul did not choose me, God did.

You then wrote, "I love it when I hear someone has had a personal encounter with the living God in which they are claiming that they have actually been in His presence physically or God has spoken to them audibly and yet they contradict His written revelation to us."

When God the Father came into my heart, He did not say a word, He did not have to. When the Holy Spirit came into my body, He did not say a word either, but He did reveal to me that the Catholic Eucharist is Jesus.

I have had two dreams that I do know were from God, whether directly or thru a representative I don't know, so I know that God chose Me, as it says, "Remember I have chosen you, you have not chosen Me", I remember.

You wrote, "In Deuternomy 18:17-22 (esp. vs. 20-22)God spoke the the Israelites about a prophet He would send and about false prophets and how to distinguish the difference. Jesus was the prophet, priest and King."

Jesus was not a "representative" of God, Jesus was God Himself, becoming One of us to speak to us face to face.

You then wrote, "You Thomas Moses Baum do not speak for God when you say what is oppose to His word."

Do you know what "His word" is?

"His word" is LOVE. "His word" is God.

Remember, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God" and that "Word" is LOVE.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You wrote, "But He has given us His word that we may verify what is true and right and good."

Seems to me that He said, "I will send the Holy Spirit to guide you into All Truth...", didn't He?

I imagine by "His word", you are speaking of the bible, doesn't it say in there something to the effect, "They have eyes but do not see, ears but do not hear...", seems pretty obvious that Jesus knew what He was talking about, considering some of the absolutely vile, hateful garbage that some "bible interpretators" spew out, doesn't it?

You then wrote, "that everyone has a different truth about God and each makes Him out to be whatever he so feels God should be to him."

I have met God and God is a Trinity and is a Being of Pure Love, Love is God's Very Being not an attribute.

Jesus speaks of the "narrow path", everybody's path is different just as everybody is different. I cannot tell you or anyone else what your path is or how to walk it.

Jesus extended the invitation to "Come follow Me", it wasn't to: follow His Church, follow the bible, follow those that say they are following Me, follow ..., but to "Follow Me". He also said that He would, "Send the Holy Spirit...".

You wrote, "Jesus said to worship the Father in spirit and in truth"

Jesus also said, "I and the Father Are One".

You also wrote, "the Holy Spirit is our guide and teacher, but He does not go against what has been revealed in His word."

Do you think that God's Plan ended with Jesus becoming One of us?

God's Plan is unfolding before our very eyes and God's Plan will come to Fruition.

You then wrote, " we can know that they are false teaches."

If you are directing this toward me, I wish to point out that I have not said that I am a teacher, I have said that I am a messenger chosen by God.

You then wrote, "What you are doing when you say that God does not teach that there is only one way to God, Jesus, is you are calling God untrue."

Is it written: "I Am the Way, the Truth and the Life and no one comes 'to the Father' except thru Me" or does it say 'to God'?

I am not reading anything into it, I am reading it and taking Jesus at His Word.

God is a Trinity, I have met the Trinity, I would not even attempt to explain the Trinity, the Trinity being God just is.

You then wrote, "But remember this, the Bereans were more noble that the Thessalonians because they examined what Paul said against the Scriptures to see if what he said was true. (Acts 17:11)"

I am not here to be "noble" or "more noble", I am here to do what God chose me to do. Anyone can regurgitate words from the bible but we are suppose to digest them.

Many people read the bible and many of those people don't have a clue what is written, they might know the words but not what they mean. As a matter of fact, Jesus was quite explicit about this, wasn't He?

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Part 2

Remember also that Paul, used by God and filled with the Spirit, said to Timothy to study to show himself approved a workman who correctly handles the word of truth. (Timothy 2:15)

There is a correct interpretation and that is found by finding out what God has said, not reading into the Scriptures something different. The Scriptures warn against that.

He also reminded the church in Corinth that, "the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ." (2 Corinthians 10:4-5)

We do not wage war the same way a non-believer does. We use the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. (Ephesians 6:17)

I love it when I hear someone has had a personal encounter with the living God in which they are claiming that they have actually been in His presence physically or God has spoken to them audibly and yet they contradict His written revelation to us.

As Paul further said,
"And for this reason we constantly thank God that when you received from us the word of God's message, you accepted it not as the word of men, but what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe." (1 Thessalonians 2:13)

In Deuternomy 18:17-22 (esp. vs. 20-22)God spoke the the Israelites about a prophet He would send and about false prophets and how to distinguish the difference. Jesus was the prophet, priest and King. You Thomas Moses Baum do not speak for God when you say what is oppose to His word.

Hello Thomas,

THOMAS: "It is written, "I will write My Law upon their heart", "I will give them 'hearts of flesh' in place of their 'hearts of stone'"."

This is true. In regards to the law we know what is right. We hear the voice of the Holy Spirit speaking to our conscious, "This is the way walk in it." But He has given us His word that we may verify what is true and right and good. He has not left us without a standard, a measure. That way you don't have someone telling you that up is the same as down, that everyone has a different truth about God and each makes Him out to be whatever he so feels God should be to him. That is idolatry.

No, Jesus said to worship the Father in spirit and in truth for these are the kind of worshipers that God seeks. (John 4:24) You need an accurate knowledge of God for this to be so, and yes, the Holy Spirit is our guide and teacher, but He does not go against what has been revealed in His word. God does not lie (Hebrews 6:18). He does not say one thing one day and then the total opposite the next. There is no shadow of turning with God (James 1:17). So when someone tells His children that they have met Him and yet are saying something that are different from His word, we can know that they are false teaches.

What you are doing when you say that God does not teach that there is only one way to God, Jesus, is you are calling God untrue. You take what He says and you read into it something that is not there. When Jesus says, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one can come to the Father except through Me" you add to the word of God with your private interpretation.

But remember this, the Bereans were more noble that the Thessalonians because they examined what Paul said against the Scriptures to see if what he said was true. (Acts 17:11)

Hello Thomas,

THOMAS: "It is written, "I will write My Law upon their heart", "I will give them 'hearts of flesh' in place of their 'hearts of stone'"."

This is true. In regards to the law we know what is right. We hear the voice of the Holy Spirit speaking to our conscious, "This is the way walk in it." But He has given us His word that we may verify what is true and right and good. He has not left us without a standard, a measure. That way you don't have someone telling you that up is the same as down, that everyone has a different truth about God and each makes Him out to be whatever he so feels God should be to him. That is idolatry.

No, Jesus said to worship the Father in spirit and in truth for these are the kind of worshipers that God seeks. (John 4:24) You need an accurate knowledge of God for this to be so, and yes, the Holy Spirit is our guide and teacher, but He does not go against what has been revealed in His word. God does not lie (Hebrews 6:18). He does not say one thing one day and then the total opposite the next. There is no shadow of turning with God (James 1:17). So when someone tells His children that they have met Him and yet are saying something that are different from His word, we can know that they are false teaches.

What you are doing when you say that God does not teach that there is only one way to God, Jesus, is you are calling God untrue. You take what He says and you read into it something that is not there. When Jesus says, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one can come to the Father except through Me" you add to the word of God with your private interpretation.

But remember this, the Bereans were more noble that the Thessalonians because they examined what Paul said against the Scriptures to see if what he said was true. (Acts 17:11)

Thomas Baum,

Re - your responses to Peter Huff.

My heart is strangely warmed by what I read. God bless you, Thomas Baum.

I would say Mr Baum that we haven't progressed very far on civilization. We still tend to see the world in tribal ways of us against the outsiders. We tend to need those outsiders to blame and focus anger on, so that the thorny issues that no one likes to deal with are ignored. Our technology has grown far more swiftly than our grasp of the world and universe in cultural ways.

We are able to do things that those people would look at as miracles and the actions of gods. But if you stripped that tech from us, I don't think you would see much difference. They had laws like we do, loved, hated, fear, felt emotionally just like us. Their understanding of how the world worked was just ignorance of the science, something they could be easily taught.

I think you could go back farther than 2000 BC, back to 12,000 BC when the first cities were being built and find the same people.
I think of civilization as a ladder and we finally got our foot on the first rung and will soon have both feet there so we can take the next step. I am hopeful we can take that next step and the rest up that ladder. There is always the chance that we will kill ourselves via war or poisoning our environment or in some other way. I have faith that we can survive, that it will be costly and painful is also true. It will be a tragedy if we don't for we have the potential to be much better.

On my last post to Peter Huff I wrote, "God knew that that all would repent, that is why God has a Plan."

What I meant to write was, "God knew that not all would repent, that is why God has a Plan".

Sorry about that.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You wrote, "Mercy is the opposite of justice. In justice we receive what we deserve, in mercy we do not receive what we deserve. That is a different coin in my books."

I wasn't talking about "your books", I was talking about God.

You really do seem to think that people, at least on an earthly scale, are more merciful than God don't you?

It is written, "My Ways are not your ways, My Thoughts are not your thoughts..." something to think about considering that the "God" that you seem to have so "figured out" seems to be one of the most arbitrary, egotistical, demented, worthless piece of all-powerful yet unmerciful piece of garbage that one could imagine.

Don't worry, one day you will meet God.

You have no idea how horrible hell is and you also do not have any idea how horrible spiritual death is but I do and I am thankful that in God's Plan, God became One of us and won the keys to both and will use them in due time, God's Time.

God knew that that all would repent, that is why God has a Plan.

God knows when someone is sorry, God looks at the heart not the "formula" that some seem to think that one must use.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

peterhuff

You wrote, "Then why are some thrown into the Lake of Fire that burns forever?"

I look at the "Lake of Fire" as God's ultimate cleaning apparatus, do you have a thought on it?

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

jmorela1

I read your post and I thank you for writing it. I find it rather refreshing when I hear or read that there are people that "follow" Jesus from their heart rather than from a book.

It is written, "I will write My Law upon their heart", "I will give them 'hearts of flesh' in place of their 'hearts of stone'".

You wrote, "Evolution or adam and eve, it doesn't matter, because they both say that at one point, we had a common ancestor together. Which means quite literally we are all related. The human race is my family, like it or not."

I agree we are all one family and as I have pointed out before, a somewhat dysfunctional family.

"Evolution or adam and eve" could easily be "evolution and adam and eve" and at a point, God "breathed" something more than just "physical life" into us.

As far as "evolution or adam and eve", some want to treat the bible as a scientific treastie, both "believers" and "non-believers" alike and others want to let it be known that they know God 'good enough' that they know just what "box" they can cram God into.

You also wrote, "And one takes care of one's family even if one doesn't like uncle bernie or that cousin three times removed. Fortunately there are many in the family I do like."

The first part of your sentence is what Jesus tried to teach us "hard-heads" about "Love one another...", the second part of the sentence is what I see as a "bonus", one of many gifts from God to help us on our earthly journey and God knows personally what this earthly journey can be like since He walked it Himself.

Remember when the OT Moses said to the effect, "Lord, these are hard-headed and stiff-necked people", times may have changed but have people?

It seems to make more sense to me to have met God and try to see what the bible means than to meet the bible and try to figure out God.

With that said, I will be the first to admit that I do not know what absolutely everything in the bible means but I also do not have the compulsion to "have to know everything" that some seem to have.

I am counting on God to know what I need to know and to know it when I need to know it to do the "job" God has chosen me for.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Answering the second Post by Thomas

I'm running out of time for today. I'll shorten this.

THOMAS: "Have you met Dad, I have and Dad is a Being of Pure Love, Love is not an attribut of Dad but is Dad's Very Being."

In what way do you mean "met?" Have you had a physical meeting with God?

I have a relationship with God through His Spirit and by His Son. His Spirit leads me into the truth of His word, He does not contradict what He has revealed.

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "That is exclusive – no other way."

You take the words of the text and twist them so that you have them saying exactly the opposite of what they actually say Thomas.

Is Jesus the only way to God?
Is Jesus the only means by which a person can be saved?
Do we act hand and hand with God in saving ourselves, or is it by God's grace alone that anyone comes to saving faith?

How can you say that you know God when you constantly twist His revelation to us? Do you have authority over God's spoken word to change it's meaning?

Have to go, sorry.

Thomas, Part Two

THOMAS: "Actually, we have ALL been condemned but pardoned and with that pardon we are called to die for others, remember the "Come follow Me"."

Then why are some thrown into the Lake of Fire that burns forever?

Yes to die to self, but no to all being pardoned. "All that the Father gives to Him will come to Him." (John 6:37) That is not everybody. See verse 44 or Romans 9:6-24. No one who denies the Son has the Father. No one who denies who Christ claimed to be is saved from their sins. Jesus said to those that they will die "in" their sins. (John 8:24) Jesus has much to say in judgment of them (vs. 26)

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "The reason He does this is so that He does not compromise His justice and so we can't boast about how "good" we are."

THOMAS: "Ever heard of MERCY. You do not even seem to be coming close to talking about Justice but REVENGE. Do you realize that Divine Justice and Divine Mercy are two sides of the same coin."

It is God's prerogative to have mercy on whom He will have mercy on. (Romans 9:16-18). We all deserve justice for we have all wronged Him, but to some He gives grace and mercy. Mercy is receiving what we do not deserve. Grace is God's unmerited favor. Mercy is the opposite of justice. In justice we receive what we deserve, in mercy we do not receive what we deserve. That is a different coin in my books.

THOMAS: "Have you ever noticed how some "boast" about how "saved" they are? Are we supposed to "boast" at all or be grateful? And if we are "grateful", maybe even intercede for others since that is what Jesus did, didn't He?"

We are only to boast in the Lord Jesus Christ for He alone is worthy of all praise. Paul boasted in the only One who can save, not on his own ability or anything that he could do. When we realize there is no ability within us to save ourselves it is out of love and gratitude that we point others to Him. It is only God who can save.

THOMAS: "Since time is part of God's Creation seeing as time did not exist before God created time, have you ever thought that God could be in His Way turning eternity into time?"

I don't follow you.

THOMAS: "By the way, some seem to think that hell is separation from God whereas it isn't, separation from God is Spiritual Death."

True, God is everywhere, but separated from a loving relationship with Him for eternity. Separated by His judgment, for there is no condemnation only for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1), separated as the goats are separated from the lamb, to use a Biblical metaphor, or as the grain is separated from the weeds.

THOMAS: "You then wrote, "Matthew 1:23 is clear that "He [Jesus] WILL save His people from their sins."

No everyone is His people. There are distinctions made throughout Scripture.

THOMAS: "Jesus is God-Incarnate and God created absolutely everyone, satan created no one so ALL PEOPLE are Jesus's People."

No they are not. We are all His creation, but only those who are born again are children of God. Only those who are born again are joint heirs with Christ, only those who are born again are called sons of God. See Jesus' description in John 8:31-47, particularly verses 35, 42, 44, Galatians 4:30-31; Romans 8:15-17 to name a few.

Finally Gimpi,

GIMPI: "As to your often-voiced belief that only the Christian religion offers moral standards, for me this is simple too. I believe that my duty as an individual is to make the world better in any way I can manage, to be kind to those I come in contact with, to offer my help whenever I can, and to do as little damage as I can manage to the world around me. Kind of "golden rule" stuff."

It stands logically to reason that "religion" is conflicting because every "religion" makes claims that contradicts every other religion. How can they all be right? You can't say that there is only one way to God and with the very next breathe many ways. A cannot equal A and non-A at the same time and in the same relationship. If that were true then I could physically be standing here at my address in Canada and also physically at the same time be at your address in the USA.

As for those beliefs (kindness, selflessness, etc), they are commendable goals! If we all lived like that then the world would be like heaven, but we don't. I notice lots of comments on these post about "how good" a person perceives themselves to be and their concept is always borrowed from what the Bible says is good, to love your neighbor as yourself. That is the second most important commandment. The first is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, strength and spirit. That can only be done as Christ lives in and through you. The rest is all brownie points, so to speak - "Look at what I did."

But when you live like God commands you do it by borrowing from the Christian world view. You agree that these things are good. That is what God expects of us. But so much of the time it is also what we fail to do. It is also impossible outside of Christ, to live righteously before God. How many times have you done the opposite of what is kind and gracious and self-less? Again, does your merit meet God's perfect justice? That is why He loving sent His Son, so that we can be reconciled to Him and live in good stead with Him. The Good News is that Christ died on behalf of sinners to reconcile us to God! Please, please look up 1 Corinthians 5:14-21.

GIMPI: "No need to worry about others beliefs, sexuality, diet, clothing choices, or whatever. No "outside commandments" needed. Just empathy and compassion. And those are hard-wired into us. All we have to do is listen to them. And any God I would consider worthy of worship would have those qualities as well."

He does, along with justice, goodness, purity and righteousness to name but a few.

Part Two for Gimpi,

As for eternal torment, I don't know exactly what separation from God is, although there are graphic images and descriptions throughout the Bible because God wants us to get an idea of how serious our predicament is. But since you were created to live forever, being separated from God will be torment, for sure. Now if you expect to live in His presence without repenting, without meeting His perfect standard, why do you think you deserve to be there? Since Adam and Eve rebelled, that has been the disposition of mankind since. AS I have said before, heaven would not be heaven with billions upon billions of selfish, self-centered, autonomy human beings each doing as he/she so pleased.

And how can you call justice good, if it winks at what is wrong? God in His wisdom has decided to punish injustice. That IS good. That is why there is accountability for the evil we think we get away with because no one is watching. On earth we see people getting away with murder (literally) and wonder where the sense of justice is. That won't be the case on Judgment Day.

So those "in Christ" have their wrongful actions taken care of by Christ. The rest of humanity will take care of that injustice they have enacted themselves. That is why a Christian has no reason to boast in his/her "good" actions, only in those of Christ, for He alone has lived perfectly before God. So it is either on your own merit, by what you have earned, or on Christ's that you will stand before God.

Hi Gimpi,

GIMPI: "Peter,
This is exactly why I am uncomfortable with many aspects of Christianity. In answer to your question, NO, He does not have those rights! I believe this because:

1. I signed no covenant, no contract specifying any kinds of behavior with this individual. I can't be held to any covenant I am not party to. That's like making me responsible for your VISA debt, because we share a nationality."

The first - original - covenant God made was with Adam and Eve - eat of any tree in the Garden but not of the tree of knowledge of good and evil for when you eat of it you will surely die. They ate, disobeyed the command of God that had their best interest in mind, and in the process evil was realized and acted upon. You and I are biological children of Adam and Eve. We too have inherited the propensity to do this very same thing, to act in a way that is contrary to our good. As such you were included in Adam and as such we continue to do evil.

Have you kept God's commands - have you ever lied, ever dishonored you father and mother, ever stolen anything, ever coveted something belonging to someone else, ever worshiped something other than God, ever had sexually immoral thoughts, committed adultery in your mind, wished someone dead or thought of killing someone, taken God's holy name in vain? Just with these few alone you would be guilty before God. Hence our need for a Savior.

GIMPI: "2. I may create my children, but I can't kill them or torture them if they disobey or displease me. Nor can I torture animals that I bred, own and provide for. There are reasonable limits on my behavior towards any being that I "create" or claim ownership of. Why would God be exempt from such reason? Eternal torment for a difference of belief? That's reasonable?"

Because God owns all things He alone of any being has the right to decide what happens to that being. He can't steal, He can't covet, everything is His. He can't lie, it is not within His never changing nature, He can't worship anything greater than Himself because there is nothing greater than He is. So I hope you get the idea.

peterhuff PART I

You wrote, "Yes, God’s plan is for all, but not all are saved and not all will spend eternity with Him. He plans for some to spend an eternity separated from Him."

Since time is part of God's Creation seeing as time did not exist before God created time, have you ever thought that God could be in His Way turning eternity into time?

By the way, some seem to think that hell is separation from God whereas it isn't, separation from God is Spiritual Death.

Hell, in case you do not know, is going to God, unforgiven and unforgiving and seeing this in the light of Pure Love.

You then wrote, "Matthew 1:23 is clear that "He [Jesus] WILL save His people from their sins."

Jesus is God-Incarnate and God created absolutely everyone, satan created no one so ALL PEOPLE are Jesus's People.

You then wrote, ""ALL who receive Him, to those who believe in His name He gave the right to become children of God.""

And since Jesus is considered the Son of God, whoever receives the "right" to be children of God receives the "right" to die for others and say, "Father forgive them", are you willing to exercise that "right" or do you think getting to the "good place" is what "Christianity" is about?

You then wrote, "That does not include everyone my friend. Not everyone is a child of God. Only those who believe in Him are not condemned."

Actually, we have ALL been condemned but pardoned and with that pardon we are called to die for others, remember the "Come follow Me".

You then wrote, "The reason He does this is so that He does not compromise His justice and so we can't boast about how "good" we are."

Ever heard of MERCY. You do not even seem to be coming close to talking about Justice but REVENGE. Do you realize that Divine Justice and Divine Mercy are two sides of the same coin.

Seems as if there are quite a few people that want mercy for themself and justice for others, maybe by calling some of us "children of God" we should exercise our rights and intercede for others rather than being so preoccuppied with going to the "good place", isn't that what Jesus did?

Have you ever noticed how some "boast" about how "saved" they are? Are we supposed to "boast" at all or be grateful? And if we are "grateful", maybe even intercede for others since that is what Jesus did, didn't He?

peterhuff PART II

You then wrote, "Jesus said, "I am THE WAY, and THE TRUTH, and THE LIFE. NO ONE comes to the Father EXCEPT THROUGH ME.""

Have you met Dad, I have and Dad is a Being of Pure Love, Love is not an attribut of Dad but is Dad's Very Being.

By the way, Dad is not a Male, a Female or an It. Dad is God and my Brother, your Brother, humanity's Brother, Jesus, is God and my Knitting Buddy, your Knitting Buddy, humanity's Knitting Buddy is God, God Is a Trinity.

You then wrote, "That is exclusive – no other way."

It says to THE FATHER not to God, Jesus is the liason between God and man, humanity, since Jesus is True God and True Man.

Many, many underestimate God and His Mercy and His Forgiveness but it does seem kind of strange that some of these do not seem to underestimate God's Mercy and God's Forgiveness for themself.

More to follow.

See you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom, the new heavens and the new earth which will come with the dawning of the seventh day.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Mr Baum you make it very difficult to argue with. I would have to agree with you. I had a very conservative roman catholic upbringing, heavy on the fire and brimstone. But they gave me a bible to read, which I did, many times.
I have called myself a christian in spite of accepting no divinity. I do not throw the baby out with the bath water. When I find truth, no matter where, I accept it. Christianity doesn't have a lock on truth. But I found the message of christ to be compelling as a way of life and it fitted with my own views of how one should act towards others and the world. Do no harm and help those that need it.
We are all stuck on this one planet together, we either learn to live together or we'll die together. I am of the mind that in our little journey of life, we can either work to help all of us to have a better life or we can do what we do now, some got it made and the rest struggle on the crumbs that fall on the floor. Now I am not at the table, more from choice, but I'm not on the floor. So I feel it's my responsibility to help those on the floor to at least get to where I am.
Evolution or adam and eve, it doesn't matter, because they both say that at one point, we had a common ancestor together. Which means quite literally we are all related. The human race is my family, like it or not. And one takes care of one's family even if one doesn't like uncle bernie or that cousin three times removed. Fortunately there are many in the family I do like.

Peace Mr. Baum

THOMAS: "I believe that in the Old Testament it says that, "True Religion is taking care of widows and orphans", so isn't it something that one can have "True Religion" and not even believe in God."

Try James 1:27 in the New Testament for one such reference.

THOMAS: "Some people are more "Christian" in the true sense of the word in their hearts that don't believe in God than some that believe in God."

But without Christ their "good" works won't save them. Ephesians 2:8-10

Romans 3:10-12 is just one of many places that makes the above point clear. How can you ever measure up in your own merit to an infinitely perfect Being if just once you have practiced injustice and done what is wrong? The chances are that even the best of us have consistently sinned against this holy God. Notice how many references in the New Testament to being "in Him", "in Christ."

Humans have only just gotten started - check back in another 200,000 to see if they've managed to survive.

To the best on anyone's actual knowledge, humans have had to build on what their earlier proto-human ancestors left behind, genetically speaking. Religion has long been part of human culture, but whether it will continue have sufficient value to survive idefinitely is anyone's guess.

The oddity about religious traditions is that they change very little, while the rest of the universe is in a constant state of flux - and evolution continues apace. I suspect humans will survive, but the future of religion as we know it is a far less likely proposition.

Religionists also fail to take the long view - this is one tiny planet in a vast universe of over 100 billion galaxies. The likliehood of advanced life elsewhere is very great. One wonders if God has a plan for the rest of the countless life forms that are most likely 'out there'.

Humans are a special case on planet earth -but are probably not at all singular or unique in terms of high or advanced intelligence in the cosmic scheme of things. One thing is true - everything changes and everything evolves.

In that, we are all the same......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens

Finally,

THOMAS: "In your statement you included, "but heaven or Paradise would not be Paradise if everyone had their own ideal of what it should be like."

THOMAS: "Everyone can have their "ideal" but that doesn't mean that it conforms to ultimate "Reality".

What I meant by the statement was that unless God transforms our nature, we will still be in rebellion to Him, deciding for ourselves what is best, and in this sense our ideal of heaven would be in conflict with what it is, for we would still be fighting against what is actually good by our false conception of what good is. If you had millions of people all thinking their ideal of heaven is the 'best' ideal then we would not be any better off than we are in the world right now – everyone right, everyone an expert, every person pushing for his or her own agenda [and I use the word we, in the last sentence in a general way, not every single person specifically).

THOMAS: "What Jesus actually taught, has, in quite a few different ways, been so twisted thru the ages as to make one want to vomit."

THOMAS: "Have you ever thought, that when in the Book of Revelation, it speaks of Jesus vomiting some out of His Mouth, that this could be what it is referring to?"

I don’t follow your reasoning but to find out the meaning of the text you need to look at the context. (Revelation 3:15-22)

THOMAS: "God is also a Being of Pure Love."

And also fully just!

Part Four

The Book of Hebrews also elaborates on this same point,
"Therefore, when Christ came into the world, He said, ‘Sacrifices and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for Me; with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. The I said, ‘Here am I – it is written about Me in the scroll – I have come to do your will, O God.’
First He said, "sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them (although the law required them be made). Then He said, ‘Here I am, I have come to do your will. He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this Priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, He sat down at the right hand of God. Since that time He waits for His enemies to be made His footstool, because by one sacrifice He has made perfect FOREVER those who are being made holy. The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First He says: ‘This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put My laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds.’ The He adds: ‘Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more.’ And where these have been forgiven there is no longer any sacrifice for sin." (Hebrews 10:5-18)

And the reason the Father will not remember them any more is because they have been charged to the Son and He has made payment for them.

That is why we need to trust, rely, depend, have faith in the merits of Christ and believe that His sacrifice on our behalf has satisfied the wrath or judgment of God, and that the perfect life He lived, He lived on our behalf in order to meet the righteous requirements of the law of God perfectly, and that the death He died was in our place, therefore we no longer live but the eternal Christ lives in us, for we have been buried with Christ and when God raised Him from the dead, He raised us spiritually also. We count ourselves dead to sin, dead to the penalty and condemnation, but alive to Christ.

Part Three

THOMAS: "If we ask for forgiveness or if we don't even know about asking but are sorry for our wrongdoing, then we are forgiven. No one can pull the wool over God's Eyes, so to speak, thou, God can see into our "hearts".
According to God we need to repent, but we also need to trust in His Son. The two go hand in hand. We can repent all we like but even if we are sorry that won’t save us because any sacrifice we make to show our sorrow is insufficient in itself. Justice requires a payment or penalty for wrong doing. The wages or payment for sins is separation from God. (Romans 6:23) It also requires a life that lives in perfect obedience from that point on, or else another and another payment is needed for sin. A holy, pure God will not keep winking at injustice. The only One who could offer a perfect payment was the only One who ever lived a perfectly righteous life before God. For this very reason Jesus said,

"I have come down from heaven not to do My own will but to do the will of Him who sent Me. And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that I shall lose none of all that He has given, but raise them up at the last day. For My Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in Him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:38-40)

Now that is exclusive.

Part Two

THOMAS: "So your statement, "Sad to say, it seems as if there are quite a few that their idea of an ideal is, to say the least, very exclusive rather than inclusive, rather selfish, don't you think?"

The means God uses is very exclusive. There is no other name given men by which they must be saved. (Acts 4:12) The reason He does this is so that He does not compromise His justice and so we can't boast about how "good" we are. The Son lovingly agrees to pay the penalty for sin and all the injustices done by man, but it is only those who believe that receive eternal life, because everything we could not meet is met in the Son – justice (He lead the perfect life without sin before God), the penalty of sin (our death paid for by our Substitute), peace and reconciliation with God (there is now no condemnation), a new nature (we are given a spirit that is alive to God and a changed heart towards God), new clothing (His perfect righteousness as our white robes), a new inheritance(eternity and everything good and just and right that goes with it, in the presence of God), a new family (we are now children by adoption whereas before we were enemies with hatred towards God. It is plain many hate and resent God as they fight Him and resist Him with every ounce of their being.)

Jesus said, "I am THE WAY, and THE TRUTH, and THE LIFE. NO ONE comes to the Father EXCEPT THROUGH ME." (John 14:6)

That is exclusive – no other way.

"Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves falsehood." (Revelation22:14-15)

Now that is a pretty big list of those who will be separated from God.
So where are you getting off claiming a universal salvation, something that automatically happens for all people because God is a loving God? If He is going to compromise His justice at the sake of His love, He would no longer be just? The claim made on this forum in these posts is there are all these references to God being unjust in the Old Testament because He upheld His justice through a people? How can He be unjust if He punishes sinfulness? No He is going to uphold both justice and His love in Christ and because of this only those who are trusting in the merits and perfect work of the Son will receive eternal life.

"For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. [Here is the clincher] Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever DOES NOT BELIEVE stands CONDEMNED already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son." (John 3:16-18)

Part One

Hello Thomas, still at it I see. Some of what you say heartily I agree with, but at other times I just shake my head and wonder where you get a revelation from that opposes what the Word of God actually says.
For instance, you write, "Jesus became One of us to take all of the sins of all of humanity upon Himself and He did."

Now the part that I object to and God’s Word bears witness against is that if Jesus died for all the sins of ALL humanity then ALL would be save, and not everyone is saved.

THOMAS: "God's Plan is for ALL and God's Plan will come to Fruition."

Yes, God’s plan is for all, but not all are saved and not all will spend eternity with Him. He plans for some to spend an eternity separated from Him.

Matthew 1:23 is clear that "He [Jesus] WILL save His people from their sins." The Savior is fully capable of saving "ALL who receive Him, to those who believe in His name He gave the right to become children of God." (John 1:12)

That does not include everyone my friend. Not everyone is a child of God. Only those who believe in Him are not condemned. (John 3:18; Romans 8:1; Acts 4:12, etc.)

jmorela1

You wrote, "Mr Baum, you must be careful, less you be charged with being a liberal which is as bad as being an atheist. :)"

Can you imagine what some of the people that call themself "Christian" would say to Jesus if they would meet Him today or if they would really think about some of the things that He did and/or said?

Would some of them even talk to Him much less listen to Him?

You also wrote, "Methinks ye have been reading too much of the new testament and not enough of the old."

I believe that in the Old Testament it says that, "True Religion is taking care of widows and orphans", so isn't it something that one can have "True Religion" and not even believe in God.

I used to believe in God until I met God and there will be some, only God knows how many, that will find out that their "conception" of God has absolutely nothing to do with the REALITY OF GOD.

You made some remarks about different governmental systems devised by man, theoretically, many different governmental systems are fine but it is implementing them into the reality of human nature where they fall apart, some instantaneously, other take somewhat longer.

Some people scoff at the idea that man has a "fallen nature" but it seems to me that one does not even have to look past oneself to see the validity of this and if one looks outward, to see that this "fallen nature" is, shall we say, widespread.

One hears a lot about "left-wing" this and "right-wing" that but how many birds fly that well with one wing?

Some people are more "Christian" in the true sense of the word in their hearts that don't believe in God than some that believe in God.

As I have said, God looks at the person, not the "label".

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Mr Baum

Silent Spring was about DDT and the widespread use poisoning the land which ended up being banned. Rachael Carson was using that particular poison because that was prevalent at the time, but was making the point that we have to be careful of what we use to control animal and plant pests. If that book was written today it would add the growth hormones, antibiotics, and other chemicals like pcbs and the amount of heavy metals that are waste products of various industries and being found in our drinking and ground water supplies throughout the US.

One of our biggest problems is starting in the fifties, we became a consumer society. There were all these wonderful new devices that were going to make people happy. The next year, there would be even more new things that you had to have. People got hooked on those bells and whistles, all that advertising that we must have the newest, the flashiest thing.

Chesapeake Bay is a crime and so are the many other places. We decided long ago that the earth was to be used without any thought as to the consequences. We pillage and rape the land as if there was no future to live for, no children's children's children's and on after us. And greed is the reason.

Kings and Queens and squalor. I consider capitalism to be the same as the feudal system and many people in the world have no better life than they did 500 yrs ago because of it. The capitalist system works for about 25% of the world and I am not including the so called communist countries. There aren't any communism countries and never have been really, the so called ones are just dictators in the guise of marxism.

Mr Baum, you must be careful, less you be charged with being a liberal which is as bad as being an atheist. :) Methinks ye have been reading too much of the new testament and not enough of the old. Back when I was a child I made the mistake of doing that. And now look, I'm a liberal atheist.

persiflage

Thank you for your reply.

You wrote, "So speak if you must, but I suspect it will fall on deaf ears, given the improbability of it all."

I agree on all three, I will speak, however I can, it does seem to be falling on at least some deaf ears but my "job" is to speak whether or not people hear is out of my control and I most definitely agree with the "improbability of it all".

You then wrote, "Why divinities never take the easy (or plausible) way, remains a mystery for the ages."

I suppose by this, you may mean some kind of "big extravaganza". This will come in due time, exactly how I do not know, but God works in many quiet ways that can sometimes not be perceived as from God but can nevertheless get people to think.

Sometimes one has to step back from all of the "bells and whistles" of the modern world especially in the developed part of the world.

It seems as if we can get so caught up in the "bell and whistles", the "technological wonders" and such and not even notice that the world is a mess.

There are quite a few in the world that are living much better than the "Kings and Queens" of not too long ago while there are quite a few others that are in just as much if not more "squalor" than not too long ago.

You are probably familiar with the saying, "Better living thru chemistry", not just chemistry but other branches of science have brought about some amazing things but at the same time have brought about some very devastating changes to the environment both known and yet to be known.

I grew up on the water not far from the Chesapeake Bay and the "life" in the Bay has went very downhill in a very short span.

This is not an isolated occurance but is world-wide and seems to be accelerating and with the advent of the near-instantaneous worldwide communication system, it isn't like we don't hear about it.

I have never read the book, Silent Spring by Rachael Carson but I have heard of it and if I heard right the warning about the use of various 'cides as in herbicide, insecticide, whatevercides.

Sometimes, whether or not one believes in God, one can have a very "cartoonish" image of God bellowing out "from the heavens" when God can speak to us very easily thru other people and this "other people" don't necessarily have to know that God is trying to get thru to us "hard-heads".

We sure can act like a "bunch of bulls in a china shop" at times can we not?

There seem to be some rather "devastating" things spoken of in the Book of Revelation, have you ever thought that some could be brought on by man and by the "greed" of man in the way we can have absolutely no thought of anything except for the "bottom line" at times.

We have free will and as I have said many times, whether or not we accept responsibility for the responsibility given to us is our choice.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Thomas Baum - your message is placid enough, particularly the avoidance of the typical hellfire and brimstone of Spidermean and other Christian enthusiasts. For a message from God, it's pretty tame as these things go - all to the good.

The problem is of course the stated origins of your message and He who issued the directive to speak - that would be God the Creator of all. You also speak authoritatively in regard to the divinity of Jesus as God.

You have received this message, whereas not another living soul that we know of has been so privilaged - at least in recent years.

So speak if you must, but I suspect it will fall on deaf ears, given the improbability of it all. You would think that God would know all of this in advance, and would employ a different method of revealing Himself and His intentions.

Why divinities never take the easy (or plausible) way, remains a mystery for the ages.

regards, Persiflege

Thomas Baum - your message is placid enough, particularly the avoidance of the typical hellfire and brimstone of Spidermean and other Christian enthusiasts. For a message from God, it's pretty tame as these things go - all to the good.

The problem is of course the stated origins of your message and He who issued the directive to speak - that would be God the Creator of all. You also speak authoritatively in regard to the divinity of Jesus as God.

You have received this message, whereas not another living soul that we know of has been so privilaged - at least in recent years.

So speak if you must, but I suspect it will fall on deaf ears, given the improbability of it all. You would think that God would know all of this in advance, and would employ a different method of revealing Himself and His intentions.

Why divinities never take the easy (or plausible) way, remains a mystery for the ages.

regards, Persiflege

persiflage

You wrote, "To wit, your own experiences are limited to yourself - speaking prophetically is a grave mistake"

I would say that "speaking prophetically" if you have not been chosen to speak that way could be a "grave mistake", but for one to tell another "not to speak" could also be a "grave mistake".

There seem to be some that think that "group-think" is limited to "religion" whereas "group-think" has been the prime motivating force behind some of the most destructive movements in history and just because some have hid some of these behind a "religious veneer" should not fool everyone.

"Power", in many forms, has been a prime motivating factor throughout history whether it is cloaked in "religion" or anywhere else.

My "job" is to speak and I will speak, if someone wishes to listen, actually listen, rather than come to a "preconceived understanding", because of a "label" that they detest, then that is their choice.

Being open-minded, in my opinion, is to actually listen to what someone says rather than what one anticipates, sometimes wrongly, to what someone says and does not really hear or read what they say or write.

Then you wrote, "because it's patently unreal for others. They do not own or even share your experience. They cannot..."

This is true, that is why it is good to listen to others because even thou a "personal experience" is just that, it doesn't mean that it does not have validity.

There seem to be many that are of the opinion that if something does not happen to them then it cannot have happened to anyone else.

You then wrote, "If a person chooses to be part of a historical collective that supports supernatural religious beliefs that are otherwise unsupported, they tend to lose their individuality as the strength in those beliefs increases"

You write this as if there aren't a myriad of ways in modern society for people to lose their "individuality" and that people that believe/know that God is Real will naturally "evolve" into drones, look around, there are plenty of "lock-steppers" among "unbelievers".

There seem to be quite a few among both "believers" and "non-believers" that have such bitterness toward the "other" that they don't even see what others have written and/or said.

And thank God there are others among both "believers" and "non-believers" that are not afraid to listen and think.

There will be some from both "believers" and "non-believers" that are going to find out that God is not the egomaniac that some think God to be and that others get that impression from people that know nothing about God except in some cases know God's Name.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Onofrio;

Wonderful post, delightful to read. Pure gold.

Persiflege;

Your comment To Mr Baum atJuly 20, 7:58 PM is a model of common-sense expressed with great clarity. Two paragraphs in particular stand out;

"Individual spiritual experience is exactly that - with the emphasis on individual. Life is solipsistic in that sense - you cannot break out of your own reality. You can indirectly share - speaking the same common language with others, and that is all.

"To wit, your own experiences are limited to yourself - speaking prophetically is a grave mistake....because it's patently unreal for others. They do not own or even share your experience. They cannot..."

Wish I could have said that. And one day I probably will.

Cheers.

Alles,

What's all this debris?

Waste not your spirit on the biblic Huffer - that smug dread-peddlar - who fancies himself ein feste Burg, waving around his presuppositional faux trump-card, Chamberlain-like. O how the ouroboros has him, wheeling in rapt orbit round his mean, crumpled little moon of dogma, chasing his own a-- and thinking it the narrow way to glory...

He only posts here to gun-up his auto(dog)matic theo-machinery, to assure himself that he's still one of the Elect of God, and that you are all lost in predestined depravity. Yea, he calmly endorses his Lord's verdict that you're all ripe for outer darkness, and is intent on rubbing your nose in it well before your time is up.

His wan glee at his own certainty seeps through his every post.

Don't give him the satisfaction.

Hmmm, Peter Huff is again using the "shock value" of the physical resurrection of the simple preacher man aka Jesus.

Major problem: Heaven (if it exists) as per JP11, Aquinas and common sense is a spirit state. So where is the body?? I am sure this question has been answered by all the Christian Supreme Court judges i.e. the body decomposed somewhere near Jerusalem centuries ago.

You want to create the rules, to establish justice and right. But as our Creator does He not have the right to establish the boundaries He sets for His creation? Does He not have the right to establish justice and punish evil and disobedience? Are we not, as humans, getting our just reward for we have all sinned, we have all broken His covenant with us.
Posted by peter huff

Peter,
This is exactly why I am uncomfortable with many aspects of Christianity. In answer to your question, NO, He does not have those rights! I believe this because:

1. I signed no covenant, no contract specifying any kinds of behavior with this individual. I can't be held to any covenant I am not party to. That's like making me responsible for your VISA debt, because we share a nationality.

2. I may create my children, but I can't kill them or torture them if they disobey or displease me. Nor can I torture animals that I bred, own and provide for. There are reasonable limits on my behavior towards any being that I "create" or claim ownership of. Why would God be exempt from such reason? Eternal torment for a difference of belief? That's reasonable?

As to your often-voiced belief that only the Christian religion offers moral standards, for me this is simple too. I believe that my duty as an individual is to make the world better in any way I can manage, to be kind to those I come in contact with, to offer my help whenever I can, and to do as little damage as I can manage to the world around me. Kind of "golden rule" stuff. No need to worry about others beliefs, sexuality, diet, clothing choices, or whatever. No "outside commandments" needed. Just empathy and compassion. And those are hard-wired into us. All we have to do is listen to them. And any God I would consider worthy of worship would have those qualities as well.

Thomas Baum,

I believe that any one espousing a literal belief in the doctrines of Christianity are exactly equal as regards the value of their collective beliefs - and that they are equally mistaken in taking mythology for concrete reality.

You've seen what I've written elswhere on the thread, so my thinking is very likely consistent from post to post.

Individual spiritual experience is exactly that - with the emphasis on individual. Life is solipsistic in that sense - you cannot break out of your own reality. You can indirectly share - speaking the same common language with others, and that is all.

To wit, your own experiences are limited to yourself - speaking prophetically is a grave mistake....because it's patently unreal for others. They do not own or even share your experience. They cannot...

If a person chooses to be part of a historical collective that supports supernatural religious beliefs that are otherwise unsupported, they tend to lose their individuality as the strength in those beliefs increases - particularly in the face of chronically absent supporting evidence. Credibility is lacking.

People are both similar and different - but more similar than different in the end.

In my view, all-consuming religious beliefs impede or otherwise obstruct personal development, in the evolutionary sense.

If we arent' evolving, we're devolving.

best regards, Persiflege

Thomas Baum,

I believe that any one espousing a literal belief in the doctrines of Christianity are exactly equal as regards the value of their collective beliefs - and that they are equally mistaken in taking mythology for concrete reality.

You've seen what I've written elswhere on the thread, so my thinking is very likely consistent from post to post.

Individual spiritual experience is exactly that - with the emphasis on individual. Life is solipsistic in that sense - you cannot break out of your own reality. You can indirectly share - speaking the same common language with others, and that is all.

To wit, your own experiences are limited to yourself - speaking prophetically is a grave mistake....because it's patently unreal for others. They do not own or even share your experience. They cannot...

If a person chooses to be part of a historical collective that supports supernatural religious beliefs that are otherwise unsupported, they tend to lose their individuality as the strength in those beliefs increases - particularly in the face of chronically absent supporting evidence. Credibility is lacking.

People are both similar and different - but more similar than different in the end.

In my view, all-consuming religious beliefs impede or otherwise obstruct personal development, in the evolutionary sense.

If we arent' evolving, we're devolving.

best regards, Persiflege

peterhuff

You wrote, "It is appoint for man to die once and then the judgment. You may not like the idea of hell, but heaven or Paradise would not be Paradise if everyone had their own ideal of what it should be like. God knows best, for He is infinite in knowledge."

If one were to end up in hell, they will come to the realization that they built it themself and have no one but themself to blame.

Jesus became One of us to take all of the sins of all of humanity upon Himself and He did. Jesus won the keys to hell and spiritual death and He will use them in due time, God's Time.

If we ask for forgiveness or if we don't even know about asking but are sorry for our wrongdoing, then we are forgiven. No one can pull the wool over God's Eyes, so to speak, thou, God can see into our "hearts".

In your statement you included, " but heaven or Paradise would not be Paradise if everyone had their own ideal of what it should be like."

Everyone can have their "ideal" but that doesn't mean that it conforms to ultimate "Reality".

Sad to say, it seems as if there are quite a few that their idea of an ideal is, to say the least, very exclusive rather than inclusive, rather selfish, don't you think?

What Jesus actually taught, has, in quite a few different ways, been so twisted thru the ages as to make one want to vomit.

Have you ever thought, that when in the Book of Revelation, it speaks of Jesus vomiting some out of His Mouth, that this could be what it is referring to?

You then wrote, "God knows best, for He is infinite in knowledge."

God is also a Being of Pure Love.

God's Plan is for ALL and God's Plan will come to Fruition.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Persiflage:

You write;

"Once again, religious literalism and/or fundamentalism is a non-starter for folks that are truly open-minded and possessed of the realization that what is seemingly true today will be yesterday's news in a matter of years - as knowledge/information acquisition continues to build on itself, and as evolutionary processes both great and small continue apace."

me

How true. Whatever happened to astrology? And witchcraft, alchemy, ESP, spiritualism and seances, phrenology, bloodletting, the rod (the one that people didn't spare), workhouses, and child labor, and cigarette smoking? Eventually to be joined by religious superstition and faith as odd habits of yore.

persiflage

You wrote, "In the end, there's not much difference between Southern Baptists and Catholics - when you get right down to it."

If you think about it, anyone that says, "All whites, all blacks, all hispanics, all Catholics, all Southern Baptist, all Muslims, all whatever and fails to take into account that each and every one of the "all" are individual people, different from each other, seem to fall into the category that they seem to be putting down, don't you think so?

If anyone reads some of the comments put forth by people that will actually admit to falling into one or more of the "all" categories, should see that there is a vast range of thoughts and beliefs in each and every one of the "all" categories.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Mr Huff, I do not find insults as a way to challenge someone and open their mind. It doesn't work. People don't like being insulted and it usually results in their refusal to accept anything that the insulter says. Your condescending attitude also turns off people. The next time you use such tactics I will complain to the paper instead of to you. Maybe if you get blocked you will rethink your approach to arguing and resort to discourse instead of insults.
And I can only judge your intolerance by what you write here, not by your friends.

PHuff;

I'm trying to figure if anything could penetrate the armor plating that religion has placed around your brain. You seem unable to consider even the possibility that you might have it wrong, even though your beliefs defy common sense and are supported by no evidence at all.

I guess I could defend the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster using your style of obfuscation and stubborn refusal to face reality. It's kinda like covering your ears and singing lalalala, so nothing penetrates.

My last post, which of course displeased you, was not written by me, but by the brilliant Harvard professor of Brain and Cognitive sciences Steven Pinker. The quotes that went over your head were by Blase Pascal and HLMencken.

Einstein has said that "The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naive."

If big guns like these cannot influence or have you reconsider your bizarre beliefs, then I don't see how I could.

Einstein has the last word;

"The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science.
He who knows it not and can no longer wonder, no longer feel amazement, is as good as dead, a snuffed out candle. It was the experience of mystery - even if mixed with fear - that engendered religion.
A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense - and in this alone - I am a deeply religious man."

Einstein."The World As I See It". pp5

PeterHuff,

It's true that for a non-believer, it's impossible to carry on a discussion based on the religious bias of 'objectivism and literalism', when in fact all religion is based on the dynamics of mythology, allegory, and the contingencies of history - and whose interpretation is entirely subjective.

So for example, the immaculate conception, virgin birth, resurrection and ascention into heaven, etc. are allegorical events that point to other meanings - they did not actually happen because they can't happen on planet earth - not even once.

The 'reports' of the resurrection that you refer to were contrived based on heresay - nothing was recorded of these alleged events for 50 years.

In some ways I take the pragmatic approach toward religion made famous by William James and others - what you experience is true for you, but conversely, what you believe about those experiences may not be true.

However, his objectivist realism differs from my subjectivist idealism - where we make our own world via our own perceptions and in particular, through the inner workings of consciousness.

My personal metaphysical position rests somewhere along the panpsychism continuum below - but not without taking the findings of science into consideration as well.

William James maintained that mysticism is the foundation of religious experience, and the esoteric discoveries of mystics through the ages have laid the foundation for the exoteric beliefs of the masses of followers that rely on faith alone to service their religious needs.

You will see under his 'philosophy of religion' section the idea that while mystics have genuine nouminal/symbolic experiences of the sacred, these experiences are true for them alone - the value to others, while significant as ideas and possibilities, remains secondary.

Nevertheless, religions and religious practices, rites and rituals, are founded and supported based on these personal, highly individualized experiences. See William James, 'Varities of Religious Experience'.

Looking to Carl Jung, religious archetypes/symbology are specific to particular religious traditions.

See also Aldous Huxley and 'The Perennial Philosophy' for a highly compatible view of mystical experience and religion.

Once again, religious literalism and/or fundamentalism is a non-starter for folks that are truly open-minded and possessed of the realization that what is seemingly true today will be yesterday's news in a matter of years - as knowledge/information acquisition continues to build on itself, and as evolutionary processes both great and small continue apace.

BTW, I provide these links for your further review and exploration.....rather than as a way of ducking the issue :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_James
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldous_Huxley

I have to go. Thanks for the posts! I'll try checking in again on Wednesday.

Hi JMorela,

JMORELA: "Your proof is nonsense and you are intolerant of others and you are still insulting."

You don't know me and those who know me. I think that they would testify that I am extremely tolerant of others.

As for insulting, I'm trying to shake you out of your slumber. I'm pointing you to the truth, showing you the folly of your world view. Yes, that is painful. You are as engrossed in it as you feel I am in my belief. I hope that it makes you think about how flimsy a belief you have put your trust and faith into. I hope it points you to another look at Christianity, but that is not for me to decide, that would be by God's grace that you might consider these things.

Colin, sorry about the misspelling of your name. I notice the older I get the more typo errors I seem to make.

PERSIFLAGE: "Subjectivity. Yes mr huff we are subjective, as are you. The difference is we recognize it and you don't. And you are as subjective as the rest. It is your belief, that's subjective. And you offer no proof, but terrible logic. You have no facts. And you are so condescending in your subjectivity that only you are right."

Why is your subjective view the "right" one? Why is it true? Because YOU say it is?

Yes I am subjective but I point you to the only authority outside of ourselves that can make sense of anything. So although I am subjective and make mistakes I point you to One who is absolute truth and the only reasonable and logical explanation to make sense of anything.

The second point along the way is that God's Word in my authority. If you question whether I am being Biblical then we can go to the light of Scripture. Logically words have specific meaning that is derived from the context that they are shelled in. In this way we are different from animals in that we are created in God's image and likeness so we can reason together and communicate intelligibly. So I point you to an objective authority outside myself that is necessary for there to be truth and goodness and wisdom and knowledge and life and love and shared existence.

I appeal to the highest source that there is to appeal to, and that is the word of God. It is my authority, my standard, the highest measure, the objective standard. What is yours and why is it trustworthy? I sound like a broken record, but so be it. You keep evading the question.

PERSIFLAGE: "Well that's the problem with fanatics. Fortunately those that think like you are dying off. The new generation isn't following your footsteps. They reject your intolerance and the hate. So in a few generations, there won't be that many like you and mankind will be the better off for it. So you will lose in the end. Just like you lost your arguments."

No, the new generation are living in a sea of moral relativism. Everyone is making their own truths. That either leads to anarchy or totalitarianism. When there is no standard anything goes as truth.

As for religious fanatics, militant Islam was on the rise a few years back. We'll see. But the point I am making is that you have no crystal ball into the future. You do not know how things will turn out, so don't be so adamant that what you say is true.

You can't even determine where truth comes from. What is your source for truth, he asked in vain?

PERSIFLAGE: "The essence of Christianity is easy enough to trace - the entire mainstream Christian faith depends on the truth/fact of the doctrine of the resurrection."

It is the proof that changed the world. As one of the posts on this forum made comment of, extraordinary claim require extraordinary proofs, or something to that effect. As Robert Reymond made comment in his book, Faith's Reason for Belief, p. 154, 155:

"A survey of the sermons in Acts 2:14-39; 3:13-26; 4:10-12; 5:30-32; 10:36-43; 13:17-41; 17:22-31 and the teachings of the New Testament letters (Romans 1:2-4; 2:16; 8:34; 9:5; 10:8-9; 1 Corinthians 15:3-4) make it clear that the apostles' use of Jesus' bodily resurrection as the "doorway" to the gospel was not an abnormality at all. They used it for shock value!...Wilbur M. Smith aserts: 'The Book of Acts testifies to the fact that it was by the preaching of the resurrection of Christ [not the cross, that] the world was turned upside down.'"

PERSIFLAGE: "Without this, the entire house of cards and all related dogma fall - a phenomenon that just so happens to be the most singularly impossible event in recorded history - or was it recorded? Where?? Can we depend on the attestations of the faithful???"

The question is how thoroughly have you examined the evidence? Do you read all these negative comments by liberal scholars on Christianity and by them form you opinion or have you read some of the distinguished conservative scholars as well?

The other thing you do is fail to recognize the Word of God for what it truly is, God speaking to man, God revealing Himself to man. Instead you take any opinion of fallible man that will coincide and buffer the roots of your world view.

You need to give an adequate reason why 11 ordinary men and Jesus' followers who after the death of their Lord hid like scarred criminals until witnessing their Lord again after His death in the flesh, went out into the world proclaiming His bodily resurrection to the point of excruciating deaths.

Then you need to explain why the Roman or Jewish authorities did not produce the dead body from the tomb to squash any rumors that He was alive. A dead body would be great evidence to quench the belief that was rapidly spreading.

If you decide to do this please don't point me to some website. Instead give me the reasons you feel this is bogus and we can dig deeper into each one of them. I would also be interested in what experts you have read on the subject of Jesus' bodily resurrection, just a list.

Subjectivity. Yes mr huff we are subjective, as are you. The difference is we recognize it and you don't. And you are as subjective as the rest. It is your belief, that's subjective. And you offer no proof, but terrible logic. You have no facts. And you are so condescending in your subjectivity that only you are right.

Well that's the problem with fanatics. Fortunately those that think like you are dying off. The new generation isn't following your footsteps. They reject your intolerance and the hate. So in a few generations, there won't be that many like you and mankind will be the better off for it. So you will lose in the end. Just like you lost your arguments.

Hi Persiflage,

I don't perceive you as being open to discussion, that is why I did not bother replying to your posts on the Susan Jacob blog. I'm willing to answer the attacks that come my way, in defense of the faith, for the proofs have adequate reasons, but in return I would expect you to do the same with my posts, not just continue to switch the subject and brush aside my valid questions and concerns. You people continually avoid the question as I probe deeper into what is behind your philosophies.

I enjoyed posting with Timmy after the initial mud slinging was over. He was prepared to go deep into the important philosophical questions, and yet he never gave an adequate answer to the moral argument, his authority, or his standard.

I say that because he admitted the his standard was his subjective opinion. He also admitted that he could never know anything as absolutely true, only 99.999995% so the possibility that he was wrong was always there. Well yahoo, Hitler had his own subjective opinion and truth too, so did Stalin and Mao and every other person outside of God. So why should I follow Timmy's view of truth and good or yours or Colin's? It is flawed through and through.

The same question plagued him that plagues you, JMorela, Colin, and Deusxchna; why is you ultimate, final standard and reference point in regards to values such as good and evil the true standard, and by what authority, what measure do you use to determine it is true? This is the original question I asked all of you and nobody has been able to give a reason that is adequate.

This is the reason that there is so much of the strife and war in this world. Everybody wants to do what is right in their own eyes. (Judges 17:6; 21:16) It is the original sin all over again, "Did God really say?" Let's be the judge and jury. Let's create our own religion of atheism.

It is one subjective standard verses another subjective standard with evolutionary vision of "let the fittest survive" thrown in for "good" measure, in as much as anyone can determine what that "good measure" is. And the fittest are those who can force or persuade others that theirs is the moral "good", the "truth" of the matter.

GOLIN: ""The most common of all follies," wrote H.L.Mencken, "is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind.""

So what makes you think you have it right Colin? You take a quote from one subjective blind man and try to lead other subjective blind men down the same path that you are stumbling along with no moral compass to guide you by mere opinion.

Why is your opinion so right? Because YOU believe it to be and can find others who are also willing to stumble along with you?

As the Lord Jesus said concerning the Pharisees,
"Leave them, they are blind guides. If a blind man leads another blind man, both will fall into a pit." (Matthew 15:14)

I think that is apropos to any world view outside of Christ.

"Through Him all things were made; without nothing was made that has been made. In Him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it." (John 1:3-5))

"This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done by God." (John 3:19-21)

You, Colin, at this pint in your life, are not willing to live by the truth. Your world view cannot even establish truth without borrowing from the Christian framework as Colossians 2:3 sums up and 2:4 and 2:8 gives what you are offering.

deusXmchna

Enjoyed your brilliant essay at July 19, 7:24 PM.

Thought you might enjoy this from Steven Pinker;

"The most common of all follies," wrote H.L.Mencken, "is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind."

In culture after culture, people believe that the soul lives on after death, that rituals can change the physical world and divine the truth, and that illness and misfortune are caused and alleviated by spirits, ghosts, saints, fairies, angels, demons, cherubims, djinns, devils and gods.
According to polls, more than a quarter of today's (1997) Americans believe in witches, almost half believe in ghosts, half believe in the devil, half believe that the book of Genesis is literally true, sixty-nine percent believe in angels, eighty-seven percent believe that Jesus was raised from the dead, and ninety-six percent believe in a god or a universal spirit. How does religion fit into a mind that one might have thought was designed to reject the palpably not true?"

The common answer - that people take comfort in the thought of a benevolent shepherd, a universal plan, or an afterlife -- is unsatisfying, because it only raises the question of why a mind would evolve to find comfort in beliefs it can plainly see are false. A freezing person finds no comfort in believing he is warm; a person face-to-face with a lion is not put at ease by the conviction that it is a rabbit.

What is religion? Like the psychology of the arts, the psychology of religion has been muddied by scholars' attempts to exalt it while understanding it. Religion cannot be equated with our higher, spiritual, humane, ethical yearnings ( though it sometimes overlaps with them).
The Bible contains instructions for genocide, rape, and the destruction of families, and even the Ten Commandments, read in context, prohibit murder, lying, and theft only within the tribe, not against outsiders. Religions have given us stonings, witch burnings, crusades, inquisitions, jihads, fatwas, suicide bombers, abortion-clinic gunmen, and mothers who drown their sons so that they can be happily reunited in Heaven.

As Blaise Pascal wrote;"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."

"How The Mind Works" by Steven Pinker

The essence of Christianity is easy enough to trace - the entire mainstream Chrisitian faith depends on the truth/fact of the doctrine of the resurrection.

Without this, the entire house of cards and all related dogma fall - a phenomenon that just so happens to be the most singularly impossible event in recorded history - or was it recorded? Where?? Can we depend on the attestations of the faithful???

In addition, Catholicism in particular insists on this unlikely paradigm for all of those souls saved through Christ - a very long wait for Armegeddon and Judgement Day indeed...and then you may or may not get your body back (if you want it by then).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinity_of_Jesus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christology

Peter Huff - Ah! A Calvinist. I now recall the extremely long and tedious arguments between yourself and Timmy2 awhile back. Your new combatants should know the pointlessness of any discussion before they go much further......

The 'proof' is always contained in the belief, as regards the religiously devoted.

And as with our Roman Catholic zealot TTWSY, yet another self-confirming teleology.

Part 2 of Deusxmchna, same date as previous post.

DEUSXMCHNA: "If you don't understand the history of your own religion, you have no chance of convincing others that your particular flavor is the "right" flavor."

That is an assumption you are making. On what grounds sir?

I'll cut the carpola out about your attack on my integrity until here,

DEUSXMCHNA:: "You relied on tautology at times for proofs, and complete nonsense at others."

We must be birds of a feather then because you are doing exactly the same thing.

DEUSXMCHNA: "Before you went and stole the thoughts of others all day to post, I felt kind of bad for you."

What I have learned is through a long process of responding to world views that cannot make sense of themselves. I have read Christian philosophers such as Van Til, Bahnsen, Gordon Clark, John Frame, Gene Cook Jr., R.C. Sproul, Gary Habermas, Lee Strobels, Ben Warfield, Ravi Zacharius, John Stott and a host of the great protestant reformers to name but a few. It has been through years and years of study and thoughtful reflection. And I have their works if I need to quote from them. I have not done that, although I have used ideas that they have expanded on, but from memory, not through plagiarizing.

DEUSXMCHNA: "As far as your attempts at the Teleological argument- I suggest you study Bartel and Szostak for a (relatively) recent scientific response.
My guess is I lost you at the word "teleological" though (don't worry- you can wikipedia it)."

The question is why would a process that began by random, chance design, organize, order, arrange and purpose anything?

The teleological argument all comes with classical apologetics. I believe Thomas Aquinas and Augustine.

I suggest you study the "presuppositional" or "transcendental" argument for proof of God's existence. You can look it up on Wikipedia also, although there are far better places to look.

I'll ignore the rest of your cutting and belittling remarks. You have a good day also!

Hi DeusXmchna, In response to your post on July 19, 2009 7:24 PM

DEUSXMCHNA: "Oh Huff, you did a great job spending your day plagerizing others works & ideas just to make a fool of yourself."

I have not plagiarized anyones work. The words are my own coming from my own mind. True, I have been influenced by certain men as to my understanding and my world view, but forming an opinion or stating a truth does not happen in a vacuum. You build on your foundational or basic core premises.

You do the same thing I do, except we both are working from opposite extremes. I presuppose God's Word is truth, just as He has said it is as a core belief. You start with the subjective opinion of another subjective man when you start outside of God. Neither one of us are neutral in our beliefs, for only what comes from an omniscient Being who sees every aspect of every fact is objective.

DEUSXMCHNA: "You jump from Ontological theory, to Teleological theory, to nonsense, and back again. Taking hours between each post to research your position."

Your wrong so far. I have not had to research anything I have said since I began blogging the other day. Granted I have spent a great deal of time researching and questioning previous to this, but there is nothing new here that has stumped me yet in this brief time of two days on the bloggisphere.

I'm going to discount the rest of what you have to say until this point below.

Your proof is nonsense and you are intolerant of others and you are still insulting.

JMorela, Part 2 of the same post,

JMORELA: "So your day isn't constant and neither are the years so that's proof I am right."

No you are not right. Just because we don't have a precise measuring system on all things does not mean that there is not order to them for nothing would be measurable without order. You are confusing two different categories.

Nothing would hold together with order. Something that is capable of changing haphazardly every time is something that has no order to it. It is something that cannot be predicted in what it will do. Yet we can predict so much.

JMORELA: "So I can match your silly argument with silly ones back. Get some real proof. Not that you can."

It is not a question of matching silly arguments. It is a question of truth. What is your standard for truth? How do you know what you believe is true?

I know that "As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease." (Genesis 8:22)

That is God's promise to us. It is truth. I see it every year. It is as certain as certain can be for God dies not lie or change like you and I do.

To JMorela,

JMORELA: "I never claimed I could prove there was no god nor did I ever denied that I have faith. What I stated was that you had no proof."

There is plenty of proof, just nothing that you are open too. Your world view will not allow it for it would implode when you realized it was invalid. You will not humble yourself before God almighty, but keep shaking your fist at Him.

"I'll choose, I'll decide for myself, I'll be just like God because I'll create my own value system, I'll determine what truth is, what is good. I'll set the standard." Well how are you doing so far?

You have already admitted that everything is subjective, everything is relative, so how do you arrive at truth - oh yeah, you create it?

I was just generalizing about the orbit of the earth around the sun, not being SPECIFIC. The point was that there is an order to it, a pattern, and it follows that orbit every year and lasts approximately 365 earth days. Neither you nor I was alive millions or billions of years ago so you are talking from idol speculation about the length of days in the distant past. You nor I know all possible factors even ten years ago. Whether you have three or four seasons would depend on your particular climate belt and how close or far away you are from the equator or north pole, but there is order to the seasons, there is a time in Canada when most deciduous trees lose their leaves. There is a time in Canada when most deciduous trees regain their leaves, a time when the weather gets colder and a time when it gets hotter. It varies but it comes in the same order every year, some years the winter is colder and longer, some years it is warmer and shorter, but we do have a winter.

We see the sun rises in the general direction of the east and sets to our west. No I don't know all the specifics, neither do you, but the point is that there is an order, a pattern to most things we observe. They don't just happen randomly.

You talk about tides but unless there was an orderly pattern we would have no way of predicting the ebb and flow of the ocean, when we will get our high tide and when we will get our low tide.

We know that if we throw a ball into the air and there is nothing to block its fall, it will fall. That is order, for we can predict that it will happen. Without order nothing would be predictable to some margin of accuracy.

To Persiflage in response to July 19, 2009 7:16 PM,

PERSIFLAGE: "Peter Huff - I know your religious committments from past posts - and again, these are satisfying to you, but are based on Catholic doctrinal beliefs that are both archaic and antiquated, in my view."

I remember you too.

By Catholic do you mean "universal" or Roman Catholic? I do not share the same views that the Roman Catholic church professes to. I believe that the Reformed Faith is closest to the Word of God.

As for archaic, you are welcome to your views. Jesus Christ is as relevant today as He was when He walked the earth or created it.

PERSIFLAGE: 'Religion is not without value, but when superstition gets in the way of acquiring actual knowledge, then I see that as an impediment and a problem."

So do I. Religion is of little value, What counts is a right relationship and standing with the only true and living God, everything else is false. Those who come to God must worship Him in spirit and in truth. (John 4:24)

PERSIFLAGE: "Clinging to 'right' beliefs is the lazy man's way to salvation. As a Zen master once said, have no beliefs, if you ever expect to find the truth."

No it is not. Clinging to right beliefs is the only way of staying on the narrow path that leads to life. Truth is narrow, and without Christ you'll never find it.

The statement of the Zen master is contradictory and ridiculous. First of all it is a belief, second, if you didn't have any beliefs you would be a veggie. If you had no beliefs you would have nothing to build on, no logic, no opinion, nothing.

Belief in God is where truth is found.

PERSIFLAGE: "Of course your beliefs lead you elsewhere -as for me, life is all about unfinished business......where we go after we're dead may not be so different than where we are at this very moment - should we survive that inevitable transition."

The problem is that without the revelation from God you will not know until you are dead. Then it will be to late. And He has revealed it to us.

It is appoint for man to die once and then the judgment. You may not like the idea of hell, but heaven or Paradise would not be Paradise if everyone had their own ideal of what it should be like. God knows best, for He is infinite in knowledge.

I never claimed I could prove there was no god nor did I ever denied that I have faith. What I stated was that you had no proof.

We have 3 seasons in syracuse and it's 365 1/4 days here too. Do you add the 4 to the 365 or is it a multiplier or divider? I have never heard of the magical mystical religious symbology of 4 and 365. So putting them together is proof? Wow. And the length of the year and how many seasons is your proof?

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3437800660.html

"The lengths of the year, month, and day are not strictly constant. Solar tidal friction is slowly increasing the length of the year by moving Earth away from the Sun; lunar tidal friction is lengthening the month and the day by moving the Moon away from Earth and causing the earth to rotate more slowly. The lengthening of the earth's year is negligibly slow, about one billionth of a year every billion years, but the lengthening of Earth's day is much faster: about two seconds every 10,000 years. At the beginning of the Cambrian Period , for example, approximately 600 million years ago, there were over 420 days in each year, each only 21 hours long."
quoted from the link above

So your day isn't constant and neither are the years so that's proof I am right.

So I can match your silly argument with silly ones back. Get some real proof. Not that you can.

Part 2 of same post,

JMORELA: "Yes very moral to murder people just because they don't suit you.... I would call that very destructive, millions of people killed throughout history because they wouldn't worship your god. And sanctioned by him."

They were getting what they justly deserved, justice, for breaking His laws. And the number of people killed in the crusades and all religious wars does not equal what half a dozen atheist regimes murdered in one century - the twentieth, the bloodiest century in history to date.

If these people in the land of promise had remained (as they did because the Israelites were disobedient to the commands of God), they would have and did turn these Israelites away from the worship of the only true God. And God did protect the people He chose to make Himself known to the world and also through their lineage bring the promised Messiah into the world to fulfill every righteous requirement of God on behalf of those who would believe. He protected them despite their disobedience until they became so stiff-necked that He allowed King Nebuchadnezzar to conquer them and humble them. And still they didn't listen.

If these enemy people had stayed in the promised land whose to know (except God) what the outcome would have been. These enemy people were like you, as everyone decided for himself/herself what was right and more injustice would have resulted by this manner than by obeying God who was looking out for His people and knew the best outcome.

To JMorela in answer to Part 2,

JMORELA: "I don't believe in absolutes of good or evil. People have both the capacity to help or hurt others, some lean one way or the other."

So your way of looking at good might be different from someone else's. Whose is right, your standard or their's? Sometimes the good we seek for others hurts rather than helps them. How do you know that what you perceive as good is actually beneficial?

The reason that I would contend that there is so much strife and war and greed and intolerance in this world is because different people judge good in different ways. Because they don't look to the only objective standard and measure one subjective standard is pitted against another.

And the question that keeps coming up is why is the way you look at as "good" actually good? Is it just because you say so? Well Joe Hitler says otherwise and he believes he is right too. What is more he has the might to back up his view of good and you are the first to be eliminated because he does not view your pedigree of much worth. And judging from nature what does it matter what one animal does to another, as long as you survive you have done well.

JMORELA: "Yes that convert or die was used throughout history. Very moral, I see. If you don't believe in me, I'll kill you."

You want to create the rules, to establish justice and right. But as our Creator does He not have the right to establish the boundaries He sets for His creation? Does He not have the right to establish justice and punish evil and disobedience? Are we not, as humans, getting our just reward for we have all sinned, we have all broken His covenant with us. By His grace does He not have the right to save us (or take our life), not by compromising His justice (for then He would not be just), but by meeting the requirements of the law Himself and lovingly offering Himself in our place, on our behalf, so that His integrity still stands, for He is a God who does not change. He is always true, always just, always good. Goodness does not sweep injustice under the rug.

Hi Farnaz1Mansouri1,

FARNAZ: "To imagine that humans have arrived at a pinnacle of knowledge, whether it be material or spiritual (if there is actually a difference) is pinning one's hopes on the accomplishments of a single lifetime - as though any one has ever arrived at such a peak of personal evolvement!

I have never imagined that humans have arrived at the pinnacle of knowledge, only that absolute, objective truth can be known, because an absolute, objective moral being has revealed it.

And yes there has been a perfect man, the Lord Jesus Christ.

To believe that we keep getting reincarnated according to our karma is just another religious system of works by man. Every major religious system but one works on these principles. Christianity is by grace alone and not by works so that no man can boast about how good he is, just how good the perfect Savior is. God doesn't save us on our merits, but on the merits of His Son alone.

Part 2 to JMorela,

JMORELA: "You are no authority to judge whether I have morals."

I just made the claim that you can't make sense of anything without God and live in the world inconsistently to your world view. You recognize that certain things are "good" and others "evil" and yet you have no answer, no standard, no measure that you can point to that is objective? So why are you living inconsistent to your world view. Why do you live as if these things do matter? Why do you live as though your subjective reference point is true and just and good and right? You don't have any backing, no measure to argue with that makes sense of these things. Who are you going to point to and why are they right?

JMORELA: "I am tired of people like you preaching your 'morality' to me and insisting that your way is the only way. Your convert or die as you put it. If we're not going to join you, then we are to be silenced, condemned, to announced that we are undesirables to 'your' society."

Why are you here then? You came here either to express your views because you feel they are true and right or you came here looking for a better answer. All I am doing is pointing you to the One who can make sense of all of this. Whether you come to Him or not will be by His grace alone, not by anything I say. He will either use this or you will continue to say in your heart, "There is no God." That is not up to me to decide. But there is a better way, a way that leads to hope and life and meaning and purpose. That comes with a true relationship with the Savior and nothing else. You will either search all your life looking for meaning and purpose on your own terms, or in humility and by His grace you will see your need for the Savior.

JMORELA: "That's what I fight against, your intolerance, your discrimination, your way or else attitude, to make a more civilized society, a more inclusive one, a more tolerant world for all."

Well, it doesn't help to fight intolerance by being intolerant. You fight intolerance by truth and the light of God's Word. You reason and discuss and you question. I offer the truth in love, knowing that there is a standard outside myself by which I can make sense of this world, because God has shined His light on my life, not because I am a know it all, only He is omniscient. I come to Him for a true understanding. (see 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:16 if you have an inquiring mind)

Hi JMorela, Part 1

JMORELA: "I have spent my life better for those who come after. My hope is for my actions to result in some small way for a more civilized and rational world to exist, a world where we decide to not continue destroying the world either thru war or ecologically. A world that stops hate and discrimination in all forms."

I take you at your word that you have done as you say, but why, for what reason, in a world view that has no ultimate hope or meaning or purpose? Why did you do these things? If you are just a biological accident, stemming from a beginning of random, chance happenstance what difference are you hoping to achieve? Christianity has a higher view of mankind than you aspire to. You, in your world view are just an animal. Do you see a lion aspiring to social justice or seeking just to survive by any means possible? Will it resort to cannibalism of its own cubs if the measures are tough without remorse? So why are you so different. When push comes to shove why is it more noble to step in and take the bullet, rather than the next guy? I is not going to make any difference when you are dead so why do it?

JMORELA: "And yes you did hit a nerve by insulting me and other atheists."

I just pointed out that it is a system of belief that has no accountability and cannot make sense of the deep things in life without borrowing from the Christian belief system, that things do matter, that we are accountable to God, that there is an objective standard of goodness, that all truth originates from God, including His word.

I know you have problems with these things because you are rebelling against His authority and don't see your need for a Savior. So it is a painful reminder, yes.

Hello again Pesiflage,

PERSIFLAGE: "Peter Huff - of course you're welcome to your beliefs and your convictions. If in fact your beliefs were established as true, by now the entire world would be convinced Christians - such is not the case."

You are welcome to your beliefs too. The world is in rebellion to its Maker. It wants to call the shots, every man and woman an authority to him or herself. You want to be your own final authority so a Creator who reveals truth and right and light and goodness is not appealing to you.

PERSIFLAGE: "The dogma of religion is true for those willing to be convinced."

I can't say the same for the dogma of atheism. It is not true. And I agree with the statement about religion, but Christianity is a relationship with the Savior and as such different from "religion" per se.

PERSIFLAGE: "Whatever you imagine 'naturalism' to be, is not the basis for my observations."

Okay, what is the basis for your observation? Either we are created or we are here by random, chance, happenstance. Either we were created supernaturally or have evolve naturally or this is all an illusion. So maybe you should explain your reasoning more clearly.

PERSIFLAGE: "And yes, everything is relative and subjective - this much is established fact. Were it not for the human mind, neither God nor science would exist."

There again, you have everything backwards. If not for the Mind of God neither Science not the human mind would exist.

If everything is relative and subjective then why do you live like certain things are absolute and objective. You act like logic is necessary in order to communicate effectively or else you would have types something that was not understandable. You go to the furthest extremes to defend something that you have no certainty is true by arguing against everything Christianity stands for. You act as if murder is wrong because you strongly abhor that the God of the Bible told the Israelites to go into the land and kill the inhabitants. If all these things are just relative and subjective why do you react so strongly when someone shoots someone else or you get your wallet stolen. It's just your biological bag reacting to the stimulus around it. Yours acts one way and mine another. Some people choose to entertain their dinner gusts, others to eat them, what is your preference?

No, on many fronts you live inconsistent to your world view by your denial of God. You are living as though these things matter. Why?

I have spent my life better for those who come after. My hope is for my actions to result in some small way for a more civilized and rational world to exist, a world where we decide to not continue destroying the world either thru war or ecologically. A world that stops hate and discrimination in all forms.

And yes you did hit a nerve by insulting me and other atheists. You are no authority to judge whether I have morals. I am tired of people like you preaching your 'morality' to me and insisting that your way is the only way. Your convert or die as you put it. If we're not going to join you, then we are to be silenced, condemned, to announced that we are undesirables to 'your' society.

That's what I fight against, your intolerance, your discrimination, your way or else attitude, to make a more civilized society, a more inclusive one, a more tolerant world for all.

Let me try that link again,

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=660

Hi JMorela,

In response to your 3rd post you said: "There is no order in the universe. It's very chaotic. Oh we have tried to order nature by composing laws of certain things, but our understanding is not complete."

There is order everywhere you look. It takes the earth 365 days to rotate around the sun in its orbit. That is order. You develop from infancy to adulthood. That is order. In Canada there are four seasons. That is order. Gravitation pull keeps the moon at a certain distance from the earth. That is order. It doesn't happen randomly. There is precise order for a myriad of things.

Your just putting words on paper when you make such claims.

JMORELA: "But to say that because we don't understand, it must be god therefore..... No that's false logic, one does not follow from the other. And you still have no shred of evidence, it's all faith. And that's just a belief."

You're not listening to what I am saying. For understanding to be possible certain things must be true, logic for one. In order to make sense of anything there must be an absolute, objective, universal reference point or standard, a measure by which we can reference truth by or else it is just one subjective opinion pitted against another, and why is yours right? Because you have read more books than the next guy, or because in your pride you are thumbing your nose up at God, declaring that you know more than He does? (see Job 38:1-5 or Romans 1:18-32 if you are inclined to see the reasoning behind the statements)

You talk of false logic, but logic comes from a Mind. It is not an empirical substance as I mentioned to Persiflage. And without using logic it is impossible to make sense of anything. Language has structure. Words in context convey specific ideas. Before you start bantering the word "logic" about you need to establish from your world view how you make sense of it. I contend that you can't without borrowing from the Christian framework. Is logic universal?

JMORELA: "And you still have no shred of evidence, it's all faith. And that's just a belief."

Just as your belief system relies on faith, but it is a blind faith, one that cannot make sense of meaning or purpose or morality or logic or truth. It has no answers, or at least you have not given any that are not logically flawed.

Peter Huff - of course you're welcome to your beliefs and your convictions. If in fact your beliefs were established as true, by now the entire world would be convinced Christians - such is not the case.

The dogma of religion is true for those willing to be convinced. Whatever you imagine 'naturalism' to be, is not the basis for my observations.

And yes, everything is relative and subjective - this much is established fact. Were it not for the human mind, neither God nor science would exist.

PERSIFLAGE: "The Abrahamic God is the very same for Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - the idea of Jesus as God (and the concept of the Trinity) is of course unique to Christianity."

The God of Christianity is the same God revealed to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but not the same god as worshiped by the Muslims. The concept of the Trinity is revealed in the OT as well as the New, just explained more clearly in the New Testament, since God chose to reveal Himself to mankind progressively.

PERSIFLAGE: "Christians tend to believe that this concept is somehow superior to all others, but without any proof whatsoever."

There is only one true and living God and He has revealed Himself to mankind through what was created and by His living and written revelation to us. That is the proof that is confirmed by the Spirit of God.

Yes He is superior to all and He doesn't have to reveal Himself, but He has chosen to. You chose to deny the evidence.

PERSIFLAGE: "The fact is, Christianity is steeped in supernatural beliefs to a degree unheard of in other allied monotheistic faiths."

You're steeped in naturalism. From what you have revealed that is the only explanation you seem willing to accept, so naturally you will make everything fit into this world view. It seems to be one of your starting presuppositions.

PERSIFLAGE: "In 50 years, these beliefs will seem absurd, with Christianity leading the way."

Wild speculation on your part. Trends change. You cannot predict the future. You Science is constantly changing as more is learned. Some people say that evolution is going to be a thing of the past as more and more is known about it. Please see the list,

ph::%20%20http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/links.php

ph::%20%20http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=660

PERSIFLAGE: "The peculiar elaboration of a Supreme galactic Creator that comes to earth in person by way of a virgin birth, in order to miraculously save an earth-bound population of humans that have 'sinned', will eventually be nothing more than a quaint reminder of our ancient past......."

Again wild speculation and wishful thinking on your part, since without God you can justify whatever you want to. One man's good is another man's evil. Without God it is all relative.

Persiflage,

You wrote:

The peculiar elaboration of a Supreme galactic Creator that comes to earth in person by way of a virgin birth, in order to miraculously save an earth-bound population of humans that have 'sinned', will eventually be nothing more than a quaint reminder of our ancient past.......

&

To imagine that humans have arrived at a pinnacle of knowledge, whether it be material or spiritual (if there is actually a difference) is pinning one's hopes on the accomplishments of a single lifetime - as though any one has ever arrived at such a peak of personal evolvement!
==============================
Along with "knowledge," ethics, morality, understanding of justice figure in this. Together they are best understood as acts. There has never been a "perfect" human (not even Buddha :)). Completing, "perfecting," healing, the self, the culture, history is the task of living in the world(s).

part 3.

There is no order in the universe. It's very chaotic. Oh we have tried to order nature by composing laws of certain things, but our understanding is not complete.

But to say that because we don't understand, it must be god therefore, it's the same as when we lived in the caves trying to make sense of the world around us. So someone had to be responsible. No that's false logic, one does not follow from the other. And you still have no shred of evidence, it's all faith. And that's just a belief.

Part 2

I don't believe in absolutes of good or evil. People have both the capacity to help or hurt others, some lean one way or the other.

Well read part one. It's the book, his words that's how. He was the one who encouraged them to do the deeds. Of course they could have said no, but you answered why they couldn't with it was convert or die with this god of yours.

Yes that convert or die was used throughout history. Very moral, I see. If you don't believe in me, I'll kill you. Yes very moral to murder people just because they don't suit you. And the people who worship him are very willing to carry out his convert or die pogrom. I would call that very destructive, millions of people killed throughout history because they wouldn't worship your god. And sanctioned by him.

Thank you for proving my point about the morality of your god. And yours by the way, since you seem to agreed with convert or die.

Oh Huff, you did a great job spending your day plagerizing others works & ideas just to make a fool of yourself. You jump from Ontological theory, to Teleological theory, to nonsense, and back again. Taking hours between each post to research your position.

You know... yer right. I never heard of the Holy Trinity. I can say the Pater Noster in 5 languages (2 of them dead), but we skipped the Holy... oh wait a minute... THATS the bit about "In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti". Thanks. Thats been bugging me for years.

Without Zoroastrianism, none of the THREE Abrahamic religions would exist, not just Islam- and all 3 branches co-opted local paganisms, it's how the religions were spoonfed to converted peoples. Check the solstices and see if any Christian holidays fall on or near them... whoops! Seems the major ones do... hmmm, how did that happen. If you don't understand the history of your own religion, you have no chance of convincing others that your particular flavor is the "right" flavor.

Your problem, Mr Huff, is that you lack the capacity for advanced conceptualizations, as evidenced in your early posts. You relied on tautology at times for proofs, and complete nonsense at others. I don't know whether this is a function of age (meaning you may be too young for your brain to be biologically able to grasp certain things), or a function of deficit. I don't mean this part to be disrespectful, because it's rude to make fun of the handicapped.

Before you went and stole the thoughts of others all day to post, I felt kind of bad for you. It's as if you brought a knife to a gunfight and couldn't tell the difference between the two weapons. I'll let you spend another day researching to figure that out.

As far as your attempts at the Teleological argument- I suggest you study Bartel and Szostak for a (relatively) recent scientific response.
My guess is I lost you at the word "teleological" though (don't worry- you can wikipedia it).

Anyway- this has turned into "pig singing lessons." and such is no longer of any intellectual use, as Mr Huff has turned to other (inferior) sources for his material. If I wish to study the subjects that you touch on, but then mangled with your lack of understanding, I will do so, myself- without you interjecting your nonsensical babble to screw up any possible proper internalizing of the info.

Oh- "pig singing lessons":
"Never try to teach a pig to sing. It just wastes your time, and annoys the pig." (and in this case made him spend a whole day with his nose in books & websites posting a melange of non-sequitur ideas in an attempt to knit together ideas that typically don't belong in the same "bowl". Much like tuna & chocolate pudding. Both are nice, but together- average at best ;)

Good Day all.

There was no insult intended with your name, it was an error.

I based my judgement of god's morality simply, it based on what he has supposedly written, the bible. Since many claim that this book is his words on paper, then one can submit fairly accurately what his views are. His view was I can pick a people and send them into someone else's land and with god's help take that land from the rightful owners. His morality goes downhill from there if as if stated these are his words. Now if they are just words that people put into god's mouth, then I might be judging him wrong.

My morality is simple Do no harm except in the necessity of food and self-defense. 2nd to help those who share life on this earth. 3rd to not tolerate those who would harm others. 4th to grant respect and equality to all on this planet.
If I discovered that there were beings on other planets, my rules would apply to them too.

As to how I judge my morals to be the best, it is my experience of decades of life and countless hours of study. And I can not say absolutely that I know for sure. No one can. Oh they can claim all they want, but they would be incorrect. Faith is not proof of anything, much less being absolute. In fact faith is believing without any proof.

I don't know the universe and all of what makes it tick. I study on all the current knowledge of why things are. But I also know that no one knows any of that, oh there are scientists who know more than me or can guess, but no one knows the full why. And pointing to some mythical creature as the answer is no proof of anything either.

There are those who believe their faith so much that they say that the world is only six thousand years old. Defying all geological evidence to the contrary, now that's faith, but lacks evidence completely. You can point your finger to the heavens all you want, but that isn't proof. It's just faith.

Peter Huff - I know your religious committments from past posts - and again, these are satisfying to you, but are based on Catholic doctrinal beliefs that are both archaic and antiquated, in my view.

Religion is not without value, but when superstition gets in the way of acquiring actual knowledge, then I see that as an impediment and a problem.

To imagine that humans have arrived at a pinnacle of knowledge, whether it be material or spiritual (if there is actually a difference) is pinning one's hopes on the accomplishments of a single lifetime - as though any one has ever arrived at such a peak of personal evolvement!

Whether or not this is true cannot be established with certainty. Clinging to 'right' beliefs is the lazy man's way to salvation. As a Zen master once said, have no beliefs, if you ever expect to find the truth.

Of course your beliefs lead you elsewhere -as for me, life is all about unfinished business......where we go after we're dead may not be so different than where we are at this very moment - should we survive that inevitable transition.

That is a far more reasonable assumption than the 'paradise or hell' option......

Religion is unfortunately becoming increasingly ridiculous and marginalized - and this cannot be helped. Change happens.

Hi Persiflage,

PERSIFLAGE: "There are numerous ideas about how the universe came to be these days - the personal creator and intelligent design concept now has to take it's rightful place among several other considerations."

That is right, there are. The question is does any belief about the universe make sense and is there any certainty that you can know what you believe is true. To this I say yes, only one, because unless you have an ultimate, absolute, objective, universal measure there is no truth, no certainty, no sense in anything, no uniformity (it could all change tomorrow), just plain subjective opinion. Who do you choose to believe?

So why "should" I believe your claims as anything other than the ravings of a person with a belief that cannot make sense of anything? You have given me no objective, ultimate standard or reference point.

PERSIFLAGE: "Putting all your eggs in the monotheistic basket is emotionally satisfying, but absolutely without any kind of empirical proof - given other possibilities."

Is logic empirical? Can I touch, taste, smell, see or hear it speak. Not physically, only metaphorically. So in a world of atheism how does something non-physical come to be? So in any proof I would have to use something that is itself non-empirical to prove anything.

You continually borrow from the Christian God when you talk about absolutes, good and evil, anything that has a qualitative ring to it, but what standard do you have that is absolute? Something that is built on mere chance and random "natural" selection (evolution) is only possibilities, there is no absolute about it, nothing certain.

Look at the world and everything in it. There is design and order there, even if it has been marred by the original sin, God has left all kinds of evidence of Himself in the natural realm as well as from His revelation to us, which is more sure than anything, because it is the very word of God.

As in the beginning so goes it by you. You have made yourself the ultimate judge, the final arbitrator of all things, but you have no satisfactory answers for any of them. "Did God really say?" Your living in a system of belief called Relativism. For you it is "I choose not to believe so." "I make the rules that govern my life and no one has the right to tell me otherwise than what I choose to believe." "That may be true for you but I have my own truths."

There is no neutrality. Everyone has a position. It's just what that position is built on. (Matthew 7:24-27; Romans 1:18-32; Proverbs 1:7; 3:5-6)

The Abrahamic God is the very same for Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - the idea of Jesus as God (and the concept of the Trinity) is of course unique to Christianity.

Christians tend to believe that this concept is somehow superior to all others, but without any proof whatsoever. The fact is, Christianity is steeped in supernatural beliefs to a degree unheard of in other allied monotheistic faiths.

In 50 years, these beliefs will seem absurd, with Christianity leading the way.

The peculiar elaboration of a Supreme galactic Creator that comes to earth in person by way of a virgin birth, in order to miraculously save an earth-bound population of humans that have 'sinned', will eventually be nothing more than a quaint reminder of our ancient past.......

Hi DeusXmchna,

DEUSXMCHNA: "actually the 9/11 terrorists, and Mr. Huff believe in the same God- the Abrahamic God."

No we do not believe in the same God. The Judao-Christian God is different from the god worshiped by the Muslims in so many ways. Both state many different and contrary things about God. Logically A cannot equal A and non-A at the same time and in the same way.

DEUSXMCHNA: "The only difference is the belief in the lineage coming from the sons. The Muslims believe the religion comes down from Ishmael, Christians believes it comes down through Isaac.. (kinda like a Shiite/Sunni type situation- it's the family tree.) In any event- same God."

It just shows how little you know of the two religions. Christianity believes in Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the one triune God, Islam does not. Christianity believes that Jesus Christ was crucified and rose from the dead bodily, Islam does not. Christianity believes that Jesus is God the Son, Islam does not. Christianity came before Islam and said there is only one way to the Father, through the Son. Islam does not believe this. Jesus said that if you deny who He claimed to be you will die in your sins. Islam does not believe in whom He claimed to be and the God of Christianity testifies about His Son as One in whom we can trust and in whom He is well pleased with, that there is no other name given under heaven by which men can be saved, other than by the name of Jesus. Islam works for its righteousness whereas the righteousness that a Christian has is not his own, it is a gift of God so that no man can boast about his good works. The god of Islam is a smörgåsbord of beliefs influenced by Muhammad's dealings with pagan tribes, (goddess of the half moon), Jewish, aberrant Christian and Zoroastrian interaction.

There are numerous ideas about how the universe came to be these days - the personal creator and intelligent design concept now has to take it's rightful place among several other considerations.

Putting all your eggs in the monotheistic basket is emotionally satisfying, but absolutely without any kind of empirical proof - given other possibilities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

There are numerous ideas about how the universe came to be these days - the personal creator and intelligent design concept now has to take it's rightful place among several other considerations.

Putting all your eggs in the monotheistic basket is emotionally satisfying, but absolutely without any kind of empirical proof - given other possibilities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

Part Four of JMorela:

In the realm of truth please explain to me what you know for certain? How do you know that what you believe is true?

Has science ever been wrong and how do you know that what you believe now will not be proved wrong in the future? In other words, what is your ultimate authority for believing what you believe? Do you decide based on your wisdom and insignificant knowledge? Have you ever been able to see every aspect of every fact and how it is inter-related from the beginning to every other aspect of every fact? Has any man?

What ultimate hope, meaning and purpose does life have? If you are just dust in the wind when you die then what difference does it make in what you believe now? Does it matter? Why? So when you make a moral judgment of what is "Good" or "Right" what is the qualitative standard you use and what difference does it make if you live to that standard. (If you are not going to be judged, and life is a fleeting moment, why not go for all the gusto now, do what you can get away with?)

No you keep borrowing from the Christian world view in everyday life and in order to make sense of anything.

Part three of JMorela1,

JMORELA: "I would match my morality of atheism against the two of you any day.

I would be delighted to! Let's go deeper and see if you can give an adequate reason for your "rational" belief.

Do you believe that at some point in time the universe, life, matter, etc., had a beginning? If so what did it come from? Did something create itself and how is that possible? (How can something come from nothing and create itself for it would have to be before it could create? How could it predate itself and have you ever seen something come from nothing?)

If something always existed, what is that something and how do you know for certain? For instance, if the universe has eternally existed then what reason do you have to pit yourself against the popular scientific cosmology of the day, which states the universe had a beginning, a point in time when it began to be - the Big Bang?

Did life spontaneously generate itself from non-living matter? How did life originate from non-life? Have you ever seen something inorganic give birth to something organic or does life come from the living in every instance you can think of? Have you ever witnessed a thinking rock or a rock that is conscious, yet supposedly dissolving minerals somehow created living beings? Explain how this is possible?

Does a random chance process like natural selection have intelligence? If not then how does intelligence come from the non-intelligent?

How does a supposed process that began randomly and chaotically produce order? How does logic come from something that is illogical? How does chance produce uniformity in nature?

Who said God was a trickster?

a) Bob Dylan b) Lenny Bruce c) Carl Jung
d) Wiley Coyote

Answer truthfully, and no cheating!

The Almighty clearly has a sense of humor, but unfortunately at human expense - the Supreme Jokester.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickster

Part 2 to JMorela1,

JMORELA: "It would be amusing Mr. Puff about your spiel of religion and morality if that morality wasn't so destructive."

There again, you list all these atrocious deeds done in the name of God, without making the distinctions that so needs to be made, namely, that from the time of Adam and Eve man has done evil by being disobedient to his Creator and the Creator to be both just and good must do what is right.

Since in His goodness He cannot compromise His justice, evil or wrongful action must be punished. All these nations that God told the Israelites to destroy were getting their just dessert for their wrongful actions and practices in their ignorance of God.

They were making for themselves false gods shaped in their image and likeness, just like you do in placing yourself as the final arbitrator, the decider of right and wrong, the starting point in all judgment. You fail to look to the source of life that is outside of yourself, the objective standard that make sense of anything. Instead you take the place that rightfully belongs to God, and you think that such actions demands no recourse.

JMORELA: "Your religion has been one of the most destructive sins of any of our sins."

It is funny that you mention the word sin. What authority do you have by your own subjective opinion to judge right and wrong? Could it be that at times when you rightly judge evil as evil it is because you have the image and likeness of God stamped on you, i.e., your were created to know that some things are wrong, they have been imprinted in your make-up by God?

Hi JMorela1,

I can always tell when I have hit a nerve because of the tone of the response and the name calling. Shame on you sir. My name is Peter Huff, not Mr. Puff. It's funny how you point to the destruction and intolerance of the God of Christianity, all the time practicing the very thing that you seem so deeply to abhor.

I will be glad to respond to your comments, but I want you to know from the start that my purpose is not to treat you with disrespect but to show you, if possible, the futility of your starting point and belief system, in other words, what you have built your whole house of cards upon - a foundation resting in mid-air.

JMORELA said: "It would be amusing Mr. Puff about your spiel of religion and morality if that morality wasn't so destructive."

Let's challenge your world view in three areas; what is out there, how do you know and what difference does it make. We'll start with morality, since you object (or shall I put it that you subjectively speculate, since you still need to establish anything more than mere subjective opinion) to the morality of God.

So what is your starting point for morality, your final reference point, so to speak, and how do you know for certain that it is true?

Thanks for the replies. Unfortunately I will have to be selective in my replies by only responding to three posts, Colin's, JMorela's and DeusXmchna at this time because of time restraints.

Firstly, Colin, how did you answer my question of where you get your sense of "ought" or "should" from in life. If it is so elementry why is there no answer to the question.

Can anybody show me how Colin answered the question?

COLIN: "It was just too petty to respond too, and easy to answer for any atheist."

There's no explanatory power in your statement at all. You made a claim that you failed to back up.

No, as usual Colin, you side-stepped the whole issue because you can't make sense of it. You just blew some smoke and tried to confuse and muddy it further by creating a diversion, changing the subject in the hope of heading in another direction.

actually the 9/11 terrorists, and Mr. Huff believe in the same God- the Abrahamic God.
The only difference is the belief in the lineage coming from the sons. The Muslims believe the religion comes down from Ishmael, Christians believes it comes down through Isaac.. (kinda like a Shiite/Sunni type situation- it's the family tree.) In any event- same God.

Mr Huff;

you say to me;

"You were the one who said that "There SHOULD be a law against it." I just wanted to know where you got your sense of "should" from? You side stepped the question because it is one that an atheist cannot make sense of or give any adequate explanation of."

me.

OK You ask where my sense of 'should' comes from. I didn't sidestep the question. It was just too petty to respond too, and easy to answer for any atheist.

How about 9/11? That should do it. The day nineteen college educated young men committed an act that wasn't only horrific and terrifying, but really stupid too. They died believing what you believe. They figured the were headed to heaven. They were persuaded that the totally ridiculous concept of a supernatural God in the sky was a reality, just as you believe.

I'm sure you'll think of some way to kid yourself that they believed in the wrong god, and you believe in the true one. But what they believed is no more irrational than what you believe right now. They died for their made up God. How beautifully devout; to love the creator so much that one is prepared to die for him, and murder thousands of infidels for him.

I expect you to respond by saying how wonderful and lovable your religion is, etc. But it wasn't that long ago that folks like you would torture and burn folks like me for the simple crime of not believing that there's a supernatural SkyGod.

It is an infantile concept created in the infancy of our species. It is supported by no evidence,and no logic. It defies common sense. And one day it may destroy us all.

In the end, there's not much difference between Southern Baptists and Catholics - when you get right down to it.

I've read the KJV bible cover -> cover. I've read much of the Douay during my 5yr stint living in sin with a traditionalist catholic, going to Latin mass on Sun. I've done plenty of "comparative bible study" between the different flavors/translations. I've got 2yrs of Latin from middle school, 3 from high school, and 3 semesters in college. I also have some Greek in there, as well as having an actual Greek roommate for 4 years, so I got to speak it conversationally.
I spent ALMOST an entire undergrad in religious philosophy/comparative religions from one of the countries top Universities. So I studied scrolls, manuscripts,etc.
I studied all the greats on the Proof of Existence of God. I was almost even swayed by the the Teleological Theory (this was before the "intelligent design" crowd simplified and bastardized it), but in the final analysis when I put my personal hopes aside, the counterarguments won out.
I have spent far more time with my nose in The Good Book than 99% of those that claim to be "true believers". I put it in quotes, because the bulk of modern American Christians sway SO FAR from the teachings of Christ that if it wasn't such a travesty, it would be laughable.
The hate and intolerance shown by the current Evangelical movement is a disgrace to the ideals and teachings that they claim to follow- but again, most are very poorly schooled on actual biblical teachings, and prefer to follow false prophets of the Murdochean & Limbaughean Empires. I misspoke- I meant "false profits".... but I digress.
I've read the books. Put in more time preparing to study the subject by learning the languages, the art of philosophy, the science of logic, than 99.9% of "believers". And THEN put it far more time studying the subject- not just the curriculum chosen for me by some council of old bearded men long ago, or well groomed charismatics of late- but ALL that I could get my hands on. The scrolls, papers, treatise', manuscripts, that didn't agree with the "party line"...
And I can say I found no absolute truths.
If anything I found the opposite. The failures of great religious philosophers who spent lifetimes trying to prove God.
Regardless, the 10 commandments are pretty good rules to live by if one wants to live a peaceful & productive lives (except for the obvious commandment or two that wouldnt apply to athiests), Christs Sermon on the Mount gave some more good ideas on ways to live ones life how to treat others on this big blue marble our feet cling to.
In the end I decided to continue my search for truths in mathematics & science.I count myself as "agnostic". I don't know, for it's impossible to. I doubt, but hope springs eternal.
I have a Spongebob Squarepants marathon to get back to...

All things considered, we would be better off without Adam and Eve, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Paul, Mohammed, Henry VIII, the "great" Babs and Joe Smith when it comes to Faith and Laws.

All things considered, we'd be better off with the Druids.

Mr. NoHUCKABEEnoVOTE, you are getting me confused with Colin. It would be foolish to deny the one true and living triune God.I do not deny His existence for without Him you can't make sense of anything. Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

It would be amusing Mr. Puff about your spiel of religion and morality if that morality wasn't so destructive. A morality that according to your good book containing your moral code allows a war to steal land from other people, to slaughter those people in the name of your god, to take all their goods from them, to enslave them justifiably, and to be able to discriminate against anyone not like you. A religion that has spawned countless wars and slaughter all in the name of your morality. And mr nohuckabeenovote of the shouting caps, if your book is proof of your god, you can keep your morality and god, I don't want any part of it. Your religion has been one of the most destructive sins of any of our sins. I would match my morality of atheism against the two of you any day.

COLIN said: "You're getting totally carried away with this god thing, when as far as we know there are no gods and never were."

You know better, but you are claiming to be ignorant by telling yourself these things, if you include the God of the Bible as one of these gods.

You were the one who said that "There SHOULD be a law against it." I just wanted to know where you got your sense of "should" from? You side stepped the question because it is one that an atheist cannot make sense of or give any adequate explanation of.

You are the one making the claims that people make up gods, and I would agree, but not to the point of denying that there is not one true and living God. Because you deny Him your wishful thinking does not make Him not exist.

He is necessary in order to make sense of anything, and every time you make sense of anything you borrow from the Christian framework and go contrary to your own core beliefs and framework.

COLIN: "People make up gods. Every god who ever was - was made up."

Sure every god but not God Almighty, if you are implying that for how would you know that? You do not know all things. Just because you place yourself in His place does not make Him any less real.

COLIN: "To believe otherwise is too ignore history. Apollo, Aphrodite, Jupiter, Zeus, all made up. There are thousands more. All made up."

Yes, these gods are all made up, but are you implying the Christian God is made up too?

And you do ignore history when you ignore God's word, the Bible.

Richard Land says, "After all, more than 50% of the people in the country now identify themselves as pro-life. " Why doesn't he ask the good citizens of South Dakota what they think of that comment?

noHUCKABEEnoVOTE

you were writing to me when you thought you were talking to PHuff. So allow me to respond a little before going to bed.

You say'

"There is ONE true God" .

Me; I could say prove it, but nobody can. So I could ask for evidence, but I know there isn't any. So I'll quote Carl Sagan who says that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". And your claim is, to the un-indoctrinated person, extraordinary indeed, and you have not a scrap of evidence.

You say;
"The fact that you deny his existence tells me you have never read the Bible from cover to cover."

I say;
You got that right. It's a silly old book I wouldn't be caught dead reading it.

Like Mark Twain says;

"The bible is full of interest.
It has noble poetry in it, and
some clever fables, and some
blood drenched history, and some
good morals; and a wealth of obscenity;
and upwards of a thousand lies."

Mark Twain. In Letters from the Earth.
Quoted in "Atheist Universe". by David Mills
Ulysses Press LA.Calif.2006

You suggest;

"EVEN IF YOU DO NOT THINK HE EXISTS, pray, just ask him if he is real . Tell him that you doubt it .Then tell him you want the truth"

I respond;
Are you out of your mind? You may as well ask me to pray to Tinkerbell to watch over me and keep me safe. Or to pray to Venus to make me lucky in love.
I am as sure of god's nonexistence as you are of his existence. To do what you suggest is infantile. Praying is just talking to your fingers. Religion comes to us from the darkness of the ages, when men were fearful and worshiped anything that moved. They were superstitious to a fault, and knew nothing except how to hunt,gather and procreate. Gods were invented by these cave-men as the best explanation they could come up with at the time for life and existence.

There is no reason to believe that any gods ever existed. But lots of reasons to persuade us that folk like having gods, and made them all up. It just makes sense. Where the actual god hypothesis doesn't.

Mr. Huff- There is ONE true God . The fact that you deny his existence tells me you have never read the Bible from cover to cover. I don't mean bits and pieces .Whether you believe him or not doesn't prove whether or not he exists. So , let me challenge you Mr. Huff , before you say that you DO NOT believe. EVEN IF YOU DO NOT THINK HE EXISTS, pray, just ask him if he is real . Tell him that you doubt it .Then tell him you want the truth. Ask him to bless you and help you to stay interested as you will read the Bible from cover to cover EVEN IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE , JUST DO IT..... I PROMISE YOU Mr HUFF... by the time you get to the part that says ..." It is a fool who has said in his heart that there is no God"... You will KNOW BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that there is one GOD and that JESUS CHRIST is Lord of all .

Peter Huff;

You're getting totally carried away with this god thing, when as far as we know there are no gods and never were. People make up gods. Every god who ever was - was made up.To believe otherwise is too ignore history. Apollo, Aphrodite, Jupiter, Zeus, all made up. There are thousands more. All made up.
When Voltaire said that people would invent a god if there wasn't one, he simply had to look at all the other gods that folks have invented since the beginning of time. As a species - it's what we do.

COLIN: "... I'd be satisfied if religion was just taken out of childhood, so our kids at least - could grow up without being taught to believe in supernatural nonsense.
When it's pushed into the heads of little children - it's like hypnotizing them for life. And it is shameful and there should be a law against it."

Where do you get your "should's" from Colin? Why "should" or "ought" your way of looking at anything be "right" or "moral" or "good"? Who made you the Great Decider? Why is your opinion valid? Why is it true? What is your standard. Where does your reference come from? Why "should" you be the moral dictator that decides for others what should and shouldn't be? (-:

Please make sense of this for me.

GSS49 said: "As Christians, we should know that Christ was the most apolitical person, "Give unto Caesar...and I am not about this world..." Why would Christians concern themselves so much with the politics of earth when their goal is an eternity in Heaven."

Because Christians are called to be the salt of the earth, to hold out the truth in love, the beacon, the light, the hope, the salvation found in God’s word to a humanity lost in a sea of moral chaos and confusion, with no ultimate purpose or meaning, no absolute, objective reference that is right and good and true.

Do you just want to turn a blind eye to justice, then let any reference be your guide, any person run for office? Once society has lost God’s objective standard all it boils down to is one subjective opinion pitted against another and there is no difference between a Hitler and a Mother Teresa.

Lose the standard that is God and where do you find the standard of right/wrong, good/evil, justice, truth, wisdom, love, stability, certainty? Lose the standard that is God and you can call good as evil and evil as good, but the question remains – says who and what makes them right?

Lose the standard that God has put in place and there are no answers that make sense. If you think there are then please try and make sense of anything without first borrowing from the Christian world view. You won't be able to.

When everyone chooses their own "subjective" standard it is moral chaos. Truth becomes what they make it, even if it doesn't coincide with what is real. When one person chooses the subjective standard it's "Welcome to North Korea!" These two options are based on either preference or force but don't call either good. A qualitative standard of values needs an absolute, objective, ultimate, universal reference point that is God. Anything else is mere opinion.

If you don't stand for truth you'll fall for anything. The salt and light of God's Word preserves this world from utter chaos. If there is no recognizable objective standard then you either make the standard or are forced to live by the standard of another. People make the standard so that they can act as their own god, so that they don't have to be accountable for what is morally wrong. They can do as they please (for now). "I'm the master of my ship", "I call the shots", "I'll choose!" or "I'll be god to you and you will choose my way, as I see fit. If you don't see it my way I'll have you shot."

No the fight is about two opposing world views. There is no neutrality. Only one can make sense of anything.

Richard Land may be a dualist. He quotes scripture on Sundays, and then, makes vague references to it from Monday through Saturday in his super patriot, social Darwinist speeches. There are, of course, all kinds of conflicts between his politico-economic belief structure and his Christian politico-economic belief structure. Land argues that the two are consistent. In reality, there is no such thing as a Christian politico/economic system. Christ was a politico/economic. He was not interested at all in the politics of this world. But, Land is. The question presents itself. Why is Land interested and his teacher telling him directly in scripture that he shouldn't be?

Land either does not understand the problem, or he understands it too well and is making a good living convincing the like-minded and slow of wit that Christianity, capitalism, and American super patriotism are found or implied in scripture. Maybe he could show us where it is.

The Southern Baptist movement has a moral obligation to lead the people toward an ethical life. There are millions of Americans who need spiritual help, honest spiritual help. They do not need charlatans and con artists disguised as preachers to take their money and lead them away from the teachings of Christ.

I strongly believe, Mr. Land, if you believe what you say about your Christ, then you're banking on a death bed plea of forgiveness for what you have done to your fellow man to get you into heaven. Either that or you believe "Once saved, always saved" will save your sorry soul no matter what kind of antichristian venom you choose to spew. And, of course, there is always the possibility that you don't believe a word of the New Testament, but you've found a good way to make a lot of bucks.

Richard Land may be a dualist, or he may be shallow of thought, or he may be an outright charlatan. Regardless of what he is, he does not represent his lord or the Southern Baptists well. The Southern Baptists should rethink this fellow.

bob2davis;

you write;

"It's a huge shame that the government can't ban religion altogether."

me;

Totally agree with you Bob. But I'd be satisfied if religion was just taken out of childhood, so our kids at least - could grow up without being taught to believe in supernatural nonsense.
When it's pushed into the heads of little children - it's like hypnotizing them for life. And it is shameful and there should be a law against it.

gss49 ...word

Religious groups must be prohibited from lobbying since they inherently violate the establishment clause. It is unconstitutional to give preference to one religion over another. As individuals they may lobby congress or the president, but not as religious entities. Besides, "people of faith" are intellectually flawed anyway. They are not a group to be influencing policy decision of any sort. It's a huge shame that the government can't ban religion altogether.

Politicians who bend their knees to religion very seldom have any real faith in God. Sotomayor is going to be on the Court so the Baptists can just get over it.

Posted by: paris1969

The problem is there's a significant number of them that won't "get over it" but instead will be whipped into a frenzy to try something stupid. The religious right in the US didn't get the label "American Taliban" because it looked good on a t-shirt, they earned it.

As Christians, we should know that Christ was the a most apolitical person, "Give unto Caesar...and I am not about this world..." Why would Christians concern themselves so much with the politics of earth when their goal is an eternity in Heaven. No matter how much good you do politically, it will not get your ticket punched for Heaven.
If politics can't do anything for Christianity, then can Christianity do anything for politics? More than likely religious thinking will get corrupted, for by its nature, politics is earthbound with earthy goals. Being driven to get elected, and the spending of millions on a campaign when there are hungry unfed, sick untreated, and children unloved does not strike me as Christlike.
If our Constitution did not mandate a separation of Church and State, then every Church should!

One of the questions that has always stumped me is why liberal christians are always quoting from the new testament and why the conservative christians are quoting from the old testament. In some ways I get it, I've read the bible quite a few times. The old is an action flick, all these wonderful stories about war, slavery, sex,hate, passion and the new is a chic flick full of love and understanding, let's all be nice to each other.
But the new is all about christ, their supposed savior, the one they brag they follow. I mean if they were jewish, I could understand them hanging onto the old testament and using it. It's quite clear though that christ wanted a break with the past. He didn't say read the old and follow me. He said hear what I am saying because I am the way.
My reborn again friends are always trying to convert me by telling me that christ is the way, follow him, and yet they never use his words, it always the old and how we're supposed to hate this one or that, it's never about love or what christ was suppose to have said.
But bible thumpers, your hate literature is as safe as the KKK's, no one is going to banned the bible. But just like we don't let the KKK post billboards with their hate message, we will banned yours. You are free to read all the hate you want. It's just most of us don't want to have anything to do with your hate or in spreading it.
I grew up in the fifties in a conservative church. It didn't take long to turn me off from their message. They made the mistake of letting me have a copy of their book to read and when I read the new testament and understood that it made us christians and not the old, it drove me away from the hate.
People hold onto their hate, all that changes is who they hate. The gays are the new blacks to safely hate, just like fifty years ago it was safe to hate blacks. If they can't hate gays and liberals, they'd find someone else. The good thing is there are fewer of them, more people are turning away from hate. That's why their rabid screech of how their right to hate is being blocked. They are worried that someday, they will have no real open venue to express it. And one day hopefully they won't have any and they will just fade away.

I've always thought of the Southern Baptists as a kind of cult--kinda the jewish wing of the christian religion, but intolerable of jews. The david koresh and Jim Jones bunches sounded very similiar to these people today. They make stuff up as they go along--to fit with all the anger and rage they have just for being alive.

What's scary is they have so much power. It is the only place besides the lobbiests that republicans can go for money now. So we are going to have to keep dealing with them I guess.

It's hard to pinpoint exactly WHEN it happened, but, at the same time the ultra right gained political power, mainstream churches began to lose ground to fringe-y and backward-looking denominations.

Reasonable people of faith have allowed the wingnuts to abscond with belief. Maybe it's due to laziness, maybe it's due to modesty, maybe it's due to lack of integrity. But somehow the ultra right militant "Christians" have corrupted belief for all.

Get the bible-thumpers out of the public podium and back into their restricted little sanctuary where women are second class and people of color are not admitted. They can all be stupid and happy together. Maybe another House on C Street is appropriate.

FredinVicksburg

You write;

"The Southern Baptist Convention is driving people away from the church with rigid interpretations of the Old Testament (particularly Genesis) that don't make much sense to educated people."

me;

"Educated people" is the biggest problem religion has. The better educated we become - the more religion is revealed as just another crazy superstition from our dark beginnings. We are still trying to shake it off, but it clings on. Polls show that religion is on the decline, and seems likely to continue losing customers as education takes people away from supernatural notions of gods and angels and heaven and hell.

We have come to realize that there is more wonder and magnificence in the world of the real - than is dreamed of in the childish delusions of the religious.

Senators who lose their seats........

will be AMAZED at how many people in flyover country knew about their vote FOR Sotomayor.

and KNEW that a Senator voting for Sotomayor was Voting to Ban the Bible.....

and Remembered.

A SENATOR VOTING FOR SOTOMAYOR.........

is a Senator voting to BAN the Bible.

And voters still understand this in flyover country. Fits nicely on a bumper sticker too.

BAN THE BIBLE--VOTE FOR SOTOMAYOR

The Southern Baptist Convention is driving people away from the church with rigid interpretations of the Old Testament (particularly Genesis) that don't make much sense to educated people. My alternative interpretation of Genesis was in a letter in Physics Today (I received hate mail in response to the letter). Genesis agrees with modern scientific investigations if you interpret the words correctly. I would note that the King James version of the Bible, which seems to be used by the SBC, is not a sacred document. It is the work of a committee appointed by King James I of England to prepare a standardized English translation. I would also note that the words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the U.S. Constitution - rather, it is an interpretation of a clause that prohibits the government from supporting/endorsing a particular church as an official national church.

Wouldn't it be GREAT if we could arm and place Muslim extremists on one end of a bridge - - - Christian fundamentalists on the other end, and seal the exits?

"We write here only to make clear that a public-official defendant who threatens to employ coercive state power to stifle protected speech violates a plaintiff's First Amendment rights even if the public-official defendant lacks direct regulatory or decisionmaking [sic]authority over the plaintiff or a third party that facilitates the plaintiff's speech. * * * For the foregoing reasons the part of the district court's judgment that dismissed plaintiffs' Free Speech Clause claim is VACATED and REMANDED to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."

Okwedy v. Molinari, 333 F.3d 339 (2d Cir. 2003) (per curiam). The panel included Justice-to-be Sotomayor.

Yes, the bible is book of fairy tales, primitive superstition fit only for idiots, but everyone has the right to be an utter moron. That's why we churches.

The new arrivals in heaven were greeted by an angel guide at the pearly gates and taken on a tour of heaven's rooms.

The angel led them down a broad, very long hallway.

One room after another had giant doors flung wide open to reveal happy angels talking and laughing and having a party -- the Catholics, the Jews, the Muslims, the Methodists, the Episcopalians, and on and on.

Then the new arrivals came to the end of the hall. There stood a closed door.

"What's in there?" one of them asked.

"Oh," laughed the guide, "that's the Southern Baptists. They're happier thinking they're the only ones here."

In my view, most Southern Baptists leaders are not even real practicing Christians.

They are too limited by their literal interpretation of the primitive tribal religion of the Old Testament.

And from what I read and see, they certainly do not follow Christ's teachings.

For example, their treatment of women as second-class citizens would surely not be acceptable to Christ. It's straight out of the patriarchal practices of the ancient Jews in the desert, and it shows the Baptist leaders' greed for power.

Politicians who bend their knees to religion very seldom have any real faith in God. Sotomayor is going to be on the Court so the Baptists can just get over it.

The leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention is out of touch with the modern US, and likes it that way. They are also, in my experience, out of touch with many of their members who are center-right instead of far right. Many Christians feel they are out of touch with the true meaning of what Jesus taught his followers.

The SBC is much like the GOP: they have found that their old methods don't work so well anymore and they don't know how to get out of the corner in which they have painted themselves. Southern Baptists, like many of us Christians, read their Bible seclectively to justify their preexisting opinions about issues like property rights etc. Younger Christians are starting to reconsider Christ's teachings and are coming to new conclusions about many social issues - thanks be to God. The SBC is an old, successful bureaucracy who equates dissent with lack of faith. This is often the slowest and most difficult type of organization to reform.

I must say that JAXMAX is certainly full of hate. He should go into his closet, kneel & pray for his soul because hate is the worst of all sins.

The bigots and their rants. They no longer have a friend in the White House who did all he could to dismantle the barrier between church and state. They just cannot face the fact that our country today does not fit their desire for a 'Judeo-Christian' America.

rbaldwin2

You wrote, "The Southern Baptist Church nor are any of it's members relevant in this discussion."

Seems as if the logical extension of this statement is that anyone with any belief that you don't condone is irrelevant to this discussion.

The separation of Church and State is for no "religion" to be the "Official Church" of the land, it is not for those with "unbelief", so to speak, to be the only ones that can be part of the decision making process.

One of the things that this country was founded on was "freedom of religion" which includes "freedom from religion" but does not include the "freedom" to force one's "beliefs" or "non-beliefs" on another.

You had also written, "the church, regardless of the denomination or which fairy tale book your 'faith' is spewed from, has NO place in politics."

It just so happens that the "individual members" of any organization be it church, civic, whatever, very much do have a place in politics if they so choose.

God gave us free will and if we force ourself on others, we abuse that free will.

This "forcing" can come across in many different ways and man, humanity, thru the ages has shown himself to be very creative in this misuse of free will.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

so, sotomayor is out of land's "mainstream"? i say, thank god for small miracles. if the soon to be justice is out of land's mainstream, then who the hell is in it?--his champion, sen. jeff sessions (he of the "communist influenced naacp" and the "kkk is ok" school of thought?).

if nothing else is clear, it should be that any organization that offers a zany like land as its spokesperson is without creditability, and should be. the sbc achieved that status years ago with the help of land and his cronies. allying the sbc with the gop hasn't elevated the party, it has pulled it into the same gutter. to hell with both of them.

I used to live in Kentucky (a beautiful state) and now live in South Carolina (attractive in certain parts).

But who's worse? Mitch McConnell or Lindsey Graham?? My guess is, Graham the inquisitor will vote to approve Sotomayor, unless his fear of his biblebelt constituents run as deep as they do with McConnell - what these characters believe or disbelieve at a personal level is not the point.....it's all a matter of getting re-elected, pure and simple.

Graham and DeMint are going nowhere (unfortunately). McConnell is at far greater risk of getting trounced and losing his Senate seat during the next election cycle. Now that would be a good thing for the bluegrass state (especially if replaced with a democrat). It doesn't help South Carolina, except indirectly.

Meanwhile, Sotomayor is a shoe-in and always has been.

Being by choice not a Bible scholar, I do not know the verse in question. Ruling that a Bible verse, or any other written material that expresses or seeks to promote hatred, should not be posted on a billboard is not the same as censoring the source material. No court has suggested that anyone should take scissors to their Bible. This is just the typical fanatic's argument by making absurd, illogical leaps. As for the argument that the court will censor the Bible but not censor pornography, when is the last time anyone actually saw hard core pornography displayed on a billboard?

The answer to you query is simple...the church, regardless of the denomination or which fairy tale book your 'faith' is spewed from, has NO place in politics. The Southern Baptist Church nor are any of it's members relevant in this discussion.

SOTOMAYOR'S RULEING ON THE FIREMEN EXAM AS WELL ON HER COMMIT OF LATINO WOMAN VIEW VRS. WHITE MALE VIEW WILL NOT PUT A DENT IN HER BEING THE NEW S.C. JUDGE ACCOUNT OF THE POLITIONS DO NOT WANT TO SHOW DAMAGE TO THE VOTES OF LATINOS AND WOMEN THEY NEED. SOTOMAYOR IS WELL QULIFYED BUT HAS A FIXED MINED IN CERTAIN AREAS. I WHOULD VOTE NO.

GARAK wrote.

JaxMax must have disconnected his brain from his typing fingers. The Court in Okwedy ruled in favor of the hate groups who wanted to put up billboards inciting hatred of gays.

Typical conservaturd.

POSTED BY: GARAK | JULY 18, 2009 8:50 AM

RESPONSE

Here is part of the CNSNEWS.com article July 8 , 2009 CITING Judge Sotoamayor’s BAN THE BIBLE ruling:

In their “summary order” the judges ruled that the district court was correct to dismiss Okwedy’s claim that Molinari’s letter violated free speech rights. “Plaintiffs contend that Molinari violated their rights under the Free Exercise Clause by criticizing the billboards’ message as unnecessarily confrontational and offensive, and by creating an atmosphere of intolerance. In order to prevail on a Free Exercise Clause claim, a plaintiff generally must establish that ‘the object of [the challenged] law is to infringe upon or restrict practices because of their religious motivation,’ or that its ‘purpose . . . is the suppression of religion or religious conduct,’” said the judges.

They continued: “Plaintiffs have alleged no facts that suggest that Molinari’s purpose or the purpose of the New York law was to single out plaintiffs’ religious expression. In fact, plaintiffs acknowledge that Molinari acted pursuant to the general policy against ‘intolerance’ and ‘bigotry’ expressed in New York law and the New York City Administrative Code § 8-101. … Therefore, because plaintiffs have not shown that Molinari lacked a rational basis for enforcing that policy, the district court correctly dismissed the Free Exercise Clause claim."

RESPONSE –Senators just go ahead and ‘BAN THE BIBLE–VOTE FOR SOTOMAYOR”

Its an issue your VOTERS will understand.

PASTORS IN KENTUCKY

Get the scissors from the Children’s classes this Sunday and put them in a big pile in front of the Pulpit. Don’t mention why they are there.

Then during the sermon read Leviticus 18:22.

Then ask if that verse is in THEIR Bible. Ask several people by name. Ask them to read the verse out loud.

Look at the piles of scissors.

This verse has been BANNED and CENSORED on Billboards in the United States by Obama Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor. Okwedy vs. Molinari is the Court Case name.

Will the COURT BAN or CENSOR the vilest pornography?? No, of course not, First Amendment doesn’t allow CENSORSHIP of filth, the Courts tell us.

BAN and CENSOR Bible verses?? No problem says Sotomayor in her Official Court Decision.

Fortunately, our own Senator Mitch McConnell has announced he is GOING to REJECT
Sotomayor.

We hear a lot about politicians and their scandals. Many Senators in Washington have a motto “BAN THE BIBLE-- VOTE FOR SOTOMAYOR” . So when we have a Senator like Mitch McConnell who REJECTS a BIBLE BAN we need to SUPPORT THEM.

The Senate hasn’t voted yet.

Many Senators are rallying around the theme “BAN THE BIBLE-VOTE FOR SOTOMAYOR”.

Maybe other Senators will follow Senator McConnell. But as for me and our Kentuck Senator–we will serve the LORD. The Bible will NOT be BANNED !!!

If other Senators follow Mitch McConnell they will never use these scissors to cut Leviticus 18:22 out of your Holy Bible. Like Sotomayor ruled as a Judge.

More info directly to Pastors by direct Email, but use this if your Pastor is unaware as rapidly developing. (3.3stat/resp/affirm)

I did read the response by Richard Land, who heads the Orwellian-named Southern Baptist "Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission." In it, he refers to "soul freedom," which appears to refer as an explanation of why in the single instance of disagreeing with the Southern Baptist Convention's generations-old hostility towards the fundamental American values of "all men are created equal" and "liberty and justice for all," Senator Graham can support Judge Sotomayor.

It is worth noting that much of the commentary in Mr. Land's response referred to property rights, rather than to ethics or religious liberty issues. Not surprising, though, given that the Southern Baptist Convention got its start by insisting on the right of people to own slaves and since its perspective on religious liberty is to impose its views on religion and its religious views on everyone else in America and to suppress the rights of other people.

I'm glad that to at least a limited extent Lindsay Graham has decided to enter the 20th century. Who knows, he might even decide to enter the 21st century. As for Mr. Land, if the Southern Baptist convention were to start promoting the ethics of Jesus rather than those of George Bush' owners and the views on religious liberty of Founding Fathers rather than those of ignoramuses proud of their ignorance, this country and this world would be a lot better off.

"She is out of the mainstream of the American public."
And the Southern Baptists are not? Please.

i really didn't have to read the article when i saw the headline containing "southern baptists". this harkens to the south of old before the civil rights movement and reflects the republican base at sarah palin rallies that screamed "kill him" when referring to obama.

i didn't expect and neither was i enlightenened about their positions on sotomayor or anything else progressive or liberal.

It is a shame. The SBC's alliance with Republican politics and not sticking with teaching Christianity has turned millions of Americans against their POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS that pretend to be a church. They have misconstrued Jesus Christ's teachings with the false prophecy
of Republican Ideology. "Churches" have become corrupt, influence peddling, congressional lobbying, money dispensing machines for the GOP. They selectively choose issues that are politically advantageous for the GOP and fail to promote the broader teachings of Christ.

Shame Shame Shame ...

JaxMax must have disconnected his brain from his typing fingers. The Court in Okwedy ruled in favor of the hate groups who wanted to put up billboards inciting hatred of gays.

Typical conservaturd.

PASTORS IN INDIANA

Get the scissors form the Children’s classes this Sunday.

Then during the sermon read Leviticus 18:22.

Then ask if that verse is in THEIR Bible.

Look at the piles of scissors.

This verse has been BANNED and CENSORED on Billboards in the United States by Obama Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor.

Will the COURT BAN or CENSOR the vilest pornography?? No, of course not, First Amendment.

BAN and CENSOR Bible verses?? No problem says Sotomayor in Official Court Decision.

Unfortunately, our own Senator Lugar has announced he is GOING to CONFIRM Sotomayor.

The Senate hasn’t voted yet. Maybe Senator Lugar didn’t know, maybe he will decide NOT to
BAN and CENSOR the Bible.

Or use these scissors to cut Leviticus 18:22 out of your Holy Bible, to save Senator Lugar the trouble. Like Sotomayor ruled as a Judge.

More info directly to Pastors by direct Email, but use this if your Pastor is unaware as rapidly developing.

[Sotomayer]"is the type of justice who instead of applying the law neutrally will redefine the law to conform to her policy preferences."

This coming from someone who will only approve of a nominee whose "policy preferences" must entail being anti abortion and one who would vow to overturn Roe v Wade.

Talk about neutrality. What a hypocrite.

Show me an evangelical and likely I'll show you a Pharisee.

The so called "Christian" Southern
baptist convention started some
150 years ago as a revolt against
anti-slavery.

It has evolved into one of the most
intolerant religions, even of it's own members, in the universe of
"Christianity" while proclaiming
itself just the opposite.

No wonder the membership of this
dim brained politico/religion is
is declining rapidly. We should look forward to the day when it's
presence no longer toxifies the
landscape !!!!!!

The SBC is America's largest organized hate group.

Richard Land is out of touch. Why these leaders of small special interest groups always believe they are the mainstream is a mystery to me.

Land needs to get out of his office and visit the non-SBC part of America. I know he'll be surprised to discover that most people don't subscribe to the SBC world view (thank God).

Ask Senator Lugar when the Feds are going to start burning Bibles........ because they contain hate speech.

And why he started it all by ENDORSING Sotomayor who banned Bible verses on PUBLIC BILLBOARDS????

CNS.com, July 8, 2009 by Adam Brickley:

"In the case of Okwedy v. Molinari, decided in 2003, Sotomayor sat on a three-judge panel that upheld a lower court’s ruling (from 2001) against Keyword Ministries and its pastor, Kristopher Okwedy. The ministry had purchased billboard advertisements featuring Bible verses that condemned homosexuality."

No wonder Obama loved her.

MAYBE Lugar didn't Know about Okwedy vs. Molinari????

Lugar--Say it ain't so.

The SBC has an ethics and religious liberty committee? Wow! I wonder how many people are on it. And billboards that promote ignorance and hatred should be banned. If not, you'll have to murder people who work on Sunday -- the Bible says so.

SOTOMAYOR BANNED POSTING OF A BIBLE VERSE ON A BILLBOARD IN NYC

here is the cite from CNS.com, July 17, 2009:

"In the case of Okwedy v. Molinari, decided in 2003, Sotomayor sat on a three-judge panel that upheld a lower court’s ruling (from 2001) against Keyword Ministries and its pastor, Kristopher Okwedy. The ministry had purchased billboard advertisements featuring Bible verses that condemned homosexuality."

No wonder Obama loved her.

SOTOMAYOR--Unfit for any court anywhere anytime

SOTOMAYOR IS UNFIT FOR ANY COURT, ANYWHERE ANYTIME

Not only does she repeatedly make PUBLIC statements while a sitting Federal Judge:

“"I would hope that a wise White Male with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina female who hasn't lived that life."

but she BANNED a Billboard in New York City solely posting a Bible verse from Leviticus while on the Second Circuit Panel.

Finally, her public WARNING that she will use "empathy" not Justice directly conflicts with the Biblical Standard for Judges in Leviticus and Deuteronomy:

Lev 19:15 “ ‘Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.

Dt 1:16 And I charged your judges at that time: Hear the disputes between your brothers and judge fairly, whether the case is between brother Israelites or between one of them and an alien.

But perhaps it was precisely because Sotomayor REJECTS the Biblical Justice worldview in Leviticus and Deuteronomy that she was nominated by Obama.........since Obama SPECIFICALLY trashed those 2 books in the Bible in his speech on June 30, 2006.

Obama's speech is still on You Tube.......

until Sotomayor has it BANNED, like the Billboard Bible verse.

Well, of course she holds positions contrary to the SBC. She is neither Southern nor a Baptist.

Well, she is from the South Bronx. Does that count?

It is unfortunate that the SBC is merely a subsidiary of the Republican Party. Any time that a religious organization becomes bound by ties to political ones, the religious mission becomes secondary. I think that the membership losses experienced by the SBC reflect that many of their young people no longer want to fit into a right-wing political straightjacket. They rightly perceive the conservative Republican Party as the political arm of scared, intolerant white males and their groupies. Young SBC members might have to wait a long time for the SBC to changee; it took the SBC a long time to shed segregation.

It is also a commentary on the easy believism, no church discipline, pragmatic way that many SBC churches have operated over the past 30 years( not to mention all other denominations) and is a call to arms for the self instituted self reform that the SBC is now going under. Praise God for reformation.