Post Reply
Page 2 of 4  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
Switch to Forum Live View THE RELIGION OF TRUTH
4 years ago  ::  Jan 16, 2010 - 2:59PM #11
he-man
Posts: 3,869

Jan 16, 2010 -- 10:41AM, StephenK.Adams wrote:

Hello He-man: Well you cerrtainly proved that you have read all of, or a great deal of the document that I put forward on this site.   I do not have the time here in the library to respond to all of your questions or comments, so I will put your submission on a floppy disk, take it home with me and respond to as many of your comments as possible.  Your following comment was relatively easy to answer so I will do that now.From He-man: (On page 29 of the document --- The Religion Of Truth ---, the following words appear:) P29 God made man in his image ------ to pretend that you are in possession of such knowledge ----- etc. Who said I pretended to know? No one has seen God so that would also be an ambigous statement. My response:


By saying that God made man in his image, the Bible is saying that God and man have the same image.  Therefore, if you accept the Bible as the gospel truth, and specifically, the verse where the believers are cautioned not to change one "word" or even one "jot" contained in the Bible, then that implies that you think that you are indeed in possession of such knowledge.    To wit, they do not know what image our Creator puts forward, or even if the word "image" would apply  to such a Life Force. 


Jan 16, 2010 -- 10:50AM, StephenK.Adams wrote:


Using the word “God” instead of Creator, or First Cause, or Life Force, implies superiority for the Christian faith.


No, it was Elohim who created you! [plural]


In reply I quote the Hebrew from Genesis which actually reads:


Gen 1:27 Elohim created you man with a camera-man shadow,  males and females Elohim formed you.


Shadow is the Spirit, the vital principle or animating force within living things, which is to say that the Elohim formed man with the picture like Breath of Life or Spirit.


Here is the Hebrew: 


ויברא created אלהים Elohim את you -האדם man בצלמו photographic בצלם shadow אלהים Elohim ברא formed אתו with זכר males ונקבה females ברא formed אתם you


shadow; area protected from direct sunlight; tint, variation of a color; nuance, touch; to reduce glare; spirit, ghost  source: English - Greek Technical Dictionary


According to Stade and his followers, these were identical with the animistic theory of savages, which regards the soul as a sort of immaterial breath or shadow in which the life of the body exists source: Hebrew Views of the Nature of the Soul; ANCESTOR WORSHIP.


I, of course, believe that the LOGOS was the word of God, not the Christ, but just to show you the usage and the way the word was applied:
The Logos is a kind of shadow cast by God, having the outlines but not the blinding light of the Divine Being. source; PHILO JUDÆUS: The Logos



1Ch 25:5  All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer (chozeh= to see) in the words of God, to lift up the horn.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jan 17, 2010 - 4:46PM #12
StephenK.Adams
Posts: 1,472

 My words from one of my previous posts:


By saying that God made man in his image, the Bible is saying that God and man have the same image.  Therefore, if you accept the Bible as the gospel truth, and specifically, the verse where the believers are cautioned not to change one "word" or even one "jot" contained in the Bible, then that implies that you think that you are indeed in possession of such knowledge.    To wit, they do not know what image our Creator puts forward, or even if the word "image" would apply  to such a Life Force. 


 



Jan 16, 2010 -- 11:50AM, StephenK.Adams wrote:


Using the word “God” instead of Creator, or First Cause, or Life Force, implies superiority for the Christian faith.



From he-man



No, it was Elohim who created you! [plural]


*****************************************


Hello he-man


Sorry but your subtrafuge and your attempts to play bait and switch are duly noted.  You can bring in the name of Elohim if you like but it does not take away from the fact that the Bible says that God made man in his image.  My original statements about this situation remain valid.  Do you care to direct your next words specifically to this situation or would you prefer to continue with your bait and switch tactics?    


 

We have nothing to fear except our lack of understanding of fear itself.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jan 17, 2010 - 6:27PM #13
he-man
Posts: 3,869

Jan 17, 2010 -- 4:46PM, StephenK.Adams wrote:


 My words from one of my previous posts:


By saying that God made man in his image, the Bible is saying that God and man have the same image.  Therefore, if you accept the Bible as the gospel truth, and specifically, the verse where the believers are cautioned not to change one "word" or even one "jot" contained in the Bible, then that implies that you think that you are indeed in possession of such knowledge.    To wit, they do not know what image our Creator puts forward, or even if the word "image" would apply  to such a Life Force. 


 



Jan 16, 2010 -- 11:50AM, StephenK.Adams wrote:


Using the word “God” instead of Creator, or First Cause, or Life Force, implies superiority for the Christian faith.



From he-man



No, it was Elohim who created you! [plural]


*****************************************


Hello he-man


Sorry but your subtrafuge and your attempts to play bait and switch are duly noted.  You can bring in the name of Elohim if you like but it does not take away from the fact that the Bible says that God made man in his image.  My original statements about this situation remain valid.  Do you care to direct your next words specifically to this situation or would you prefer to continue with your bait and switch tactics?  


That was your topic not mine, so get off the bait and switch thing. If you do not know Hebrew then shut up and discuss the Greek Questions I gave you.


So....What happened to your research on all of the other pages that I mentioned?


 

1Ch 25:5  All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer (chozeh= to see) in the words of God, to lift up the horn.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jan 18, 2010 - 2:05PM #14
StephenK.Adams
Posts: 1,472

Jan 17, 2010 -- 6:27PM, he-man wrote:


Jan 17, 2010 -- 4:46PM, StephenK.Adams wrote:


 My words from one of my previous posts:


By saying that God made man in his image, the Bible is saying that God and man have the same image.  Therefore, if you accept the Bible as the gospel truth, and specifically, the verse where the believers are cautioned not to change one "word" or even one "jot" contained in the Bible, then that implies that you think that you are indeed in possession of such knowledge.    To wit, they do not know what image our Creator puts forward, or even if the word "image" would apply  to such a Life Force. 


 



Jan 16, 2010 -- 11:50AM, StephenK.Adams wrote:


Using the word “God” instead of Creator, or First Cause, or Life Force, implies superiority for the Christian faith.



From he-man



No, it was Elohim who created you! [plural]


*****************************************


Hello he-man


Sorry but your subtrafuge and your attempts to play bait and switch are duly noted.  You can bring in the name of Elohim if you like but it does not take away from the fact that the Bible says that God made man in his image.  My original statements about this situation remain valid.  Do you care to direct your next words specifically to this situation or would you prefer to continue with your bait and switch tactics?  


 


From he-man



That was your topic not mine, so get off the bait and switch thing. If you do not know Hebrew then shut up and discuss the Greek Questions I gave you.


My response


My topic was about the expression -- "God made man in his image."  Your response tried to switch and bait me into a discussion about Elohim.  Don't play games with me son.  If you don't have the courage to address the situation about mankind being unable to determine God's image, than just say so and stop your evasive and avoidance behavior.


I suppose you are trying to impress me with all this talk about your advanced knowledge about Jewish history and Greek history. but as Shania Twain says, --- That don't impress me much..  What does impress me is your obstinate desire to direct the conversation into areas where you believe you are superior.  Fine, I admit that you know far more about Jewish history and Greek history than I do.  Now are you, or are you not going to address the topic in question --- God's image and our inability to know anything about such an image.


Once again, if you refuse to do so, why not just admit it instead of all of this bluster about how brilliant you are.        


 


 

We have nothing to fear except our lack of understanding of fear itself.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jan 18, 2010 - 2:13PM #15
StephenK.Adams
Posts: 1,472

From he-man


So....What happened to your research on all of the other pages that I mentioned?


My response


By using the word research, you gave your motivation away.   You wanted to overwhelm me with the breadth of your knowledge and keep me busy for hours trying to answer your questions.


If you have noticed, you have kept me at the top of the Other Beliefs Board.  Thanks for the valuable advertising.  I have had problems getting access to a computer at my local library but even if I didn't, I would still take my time answering your questions.  I've got enough for 10 different submissions from I think it is your #6 post.


Here's one of them comng up right now. Enjoy.




We have nothing to fear except our lack of understanding of fear itself.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jan 18, 2010 - 2:40PM #16
StephenK.Adams
Posts: 1,472

From he-man


P20 You said, " he probably blamed (it) on Satin and/or the Devil," which is ambigous because the Bible does not teach a personification of a "Satan", ie devil. You are resopnsible alone as stated in answer top P15 above. There is no monster as such in my Bible


My response


Then where did this idea of a Devil or Satan come from.  When I went to church as a child all I ever heard about was how the Devil would burn you in hell if you didn't tow the line.  I didn't get this stuff out of a comic book, it came right out of the Christian Church my parents took me to.


From he-man  


P23 re:the resurrection; Mathew 27, Verses 52 and 53; see my answer to P19.


P19 Albert Ellis shows his ignorance when he says, " death existence in a place called heaven, whose existence only resides in the imaginary world of the believer.” Why? Because there is no place called "heaven" where a believer goes after death. When a person dies he is buried and silent in the grave. Until such as time as But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: 1Co 15:35,36


My response


Nice try he-man but your evasiveness is showing worse than a woman's slip. For the benefit of those reading these submissions, here is the topic that he-man is supposedly talking about.  Of course he switches to talking about Albert Ellis and conveniently avoids a direct discussion of the Matthew issue.


From Page 23 of the Document describing the ROT


A  STUDY IN IRRATIONALITY


 The following is one of the most preposterous statements in the entire Bible.  It occurs in Mathew 27, Verses 52 and 53  [re the resurrection.]


 52 -- And the tombs were opened and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep  were raised.


 53 -- And coming out of the tombs after His [Jesus’] resurrection, they entered the Holy city and appeared to many.


 So, all these dead people came back to life and were seen by many in the Holy city and not another word is mentioned about them by any other writer in the Bible!!  Nobody asked them what Heaven was like, or what lies beyond the grave??????? 


 That makes the whole statement irrational.  It would be similar to John F. Kennedy coming up out of his grave and walking into the White House to shake hands with Barack O’bama and not another word was ever spoken or written about it.


**************************


My response to he-an's earlier statement 


I must admit that I was surprised that you included the Matthew 27, Verses 52 and 53  verses in your submission.  However, it soon became apparent to me that by confronting me with this story, you believed that you could adequately defend it and thereby put it to rest.   


Sorry, but it didn’t work!


This story from Matthew is not just one that asks the reader to totally embrace blind faith, it actually asks the reader to defy reality.  To repeat:  If President John Kennedy walked into the White House and shook hands with Barack O’bama and it was reported on CNN, would you actually believe that not another word would be spoken about it by anyone else?


That type of scenario is exactly what the reader is being asked to believe in the Bible; because not another word about all of these dead people “who were seen in the city” is ever spoken about again in any other part of the Bible.


I’m not sure when the last editing of the Bible occurred, but I am sure of the following statement.  Since that time, many a religious scholar has secretly wished that these verses from Matthew had been edited out of existence, as was the case with other such superstitious and irrational comments from other areas of the last pre-edited Bible.


Of course it is also a reflection of the captive “audience” that the Church’s authorities had at that time.  Most, if not all of the members, in the Pews were prepared to accept almost anything that the so-called “wise” leaders of the church decided to “feed” them.  These verses from Matthew represent a picture of gullibility writ large.  A convoluted decent into superstitious rhetoric rivaling the Grand Canyon.


 So go ahead he-man, rack your brain in an effort to come up with some deceptive defense of this mythical cornerstone of the Christian fable, but please, do not insult the intelligence of, not only myself, but also the intelligence of the other people who are reading these submissions.


 To put it bluntly, or in other words, to face the truth, this story in Matthew represents irrationality on a grand scale.   A fairy tale that makes other fairy tales blush.   A study in delusion rarely duplicated.  A distortion of reality that quite literally --- boogles the mind. 


 So lets have enough of your evasive tactics he-man, just give me, and the other people reading these submissions, a simple yes or no answer.  Do you believe that this story from Mathew is irrational?


 YES OR NO.

We have nothing to fear except our lack of understanding of fear itself.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jan 18, 2010 - 8:10PM #17
he-man
Posts: 3,869

Jan 17, 2010 -- 6:27PM, he-man wrote:

From he-man

P20 You said, " he probably blamed (it) on Satin and/or the Devil," which is ambigous because the Bible does not teach a personification of a "Satan", ie devil. You are resopnsible alone as stated in answer top P15 above. There is no monster as such in my Bible




Jan 18, 2010 -- 2:40PM, StephenK.Adams wrote:

My response

Then where did this idea of a Devil or Satan come from.  When I went to church as a child all I ever heard about was how the Devil would burn you in hell if you didn't tow the line.  I didn't get this stuff out of a comic book, it came right out of the Christian Church my parents took me to.


I suppose it came from an error when they read Isa 14:4  That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!

However, you will note that reading verse 4, "That you will take up this proverb against the "King of Babylon" and say, "How has the oppressor ceased, the golden city ceased," it becomes clear that this is the King of Babylon and his nation that is being spoken of here.

While this mythological information is available today via translated Babylonian cuneiform text taken from day tablets, it was not as readily available at the time of the Latin translation of the Bible.
Thus, early so-called Christian tradition interperted the passage as a reference to the moment a demoniac  being was thrown from heaven. Lucifer became another name for a mythological Satan and has remained so due to so-called Christian dogma and popular tradition.

Jan 17, 2010 -- 6:27PM, he-man wrote:

From he-man  

P23 re:the resurrection; Mathew 27, Verses 52 and 53; see my answer to P19.

P19 Albert Ellis shows his ignorance when he says, " death existence in a place called heaven, whose existence only resides in the imaginary world of the believer.” Why? Because there is no place called "heaven" where a believer goes after death. When a person dies he is buried and silent in the grave. Until such as time as But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: 1Co 15:35,36



Jan 18, 2010 -- 2:40PM, StephenK.Adams wrote:

My response

Nice try he-man but your evasiveness is showing worse than a woman's slip. For the benefit of those reading these submissions, here is the topic that he-man is supposedly talking about.  Of course he switches to talking about Albert Ellis and conveniently avoids a direct discussion of the Matthew issue.

 The following is one of the most preposterous statements in the entire Bible.  It occurs in Mathew 27, Verses 52 and 53  [re the resurrection.] 52 -- And the tombs were opened and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep  were raised. 53 -- And coming out of the tombs after His [Jesus’] resurrection, they entered the Holy city and appeared to many.
 So, all these dead people came back to life and were seen by many in the Holy city and not another word is mentioned about them by any other writer in the Bible!!  Nobody asked them what Heaven was like, or what lies beyond the grave???????   So lets have enough of your evasive tactics he-man, just give me, and the other people reading these submissions, a simple yes or no answer.  Do you believe that this story from Mathew is irrational? YES OR NO.


Yes, and he went into the Holy City--that city where He, had been condemned, present to many.
The NIV, ESV, RSV, NASB, says "They" not "He" I will stick with "He" went to Jerusalem, the Holy City to be present with many believers, which is to say not everybody. The word "they" or "He" is not in the MSS (see the Greek below)


Paul's argument in Col 2.15:" And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross." MIGHT find a reference to this 'public' display of the resurrection power of Jesus and as part of the enlivening of the dry bones in Ezek 37.


See also the Davidic Messiah (see Ezek 37:24-25) bringing about this raising of the dead.
At Masada, where Jewish Zealots made their last stand against the Roman armies in AD 73, in the floor of the synagogue were found fragments of a scroll on which was written Ezekiel's account of his vision of the raising of the dead bones.


Ezek 37:12-13 may be the key passage behind Matt's description both in this line and in what follows, for it offers the only opening of tombs (as distinct from the simple raising of the dead)
[www.Christian-thinktank.com] From the Greek MSS:
Mt 27:52 ┬ και τα μνημια ανεωχθησαν και πολλα σωματα των κεκοιμημενων αγιων ηγερθησαν  and the sepulchers were opened, and many bodies of the saints being asleep, awoke; see 1Th 4:14
53  και εξελθοντες εκ των μνημιων μετα την εγερσιν αυτου εις την αγιαν πολιν ενεφανισθησαν πολλοις
and they came out of the sepulchers after his resurrection, and he went into the Holy City, present to many.


Isa 26:19  Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
1Co 15:20  But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
A quote from an old Timer: "We must not covet to be wise above what is written"


And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.


But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection. Rev 20:4,5

1Ch 25:5  All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer (chozeh= to see) in the words of God, to lift up the horn.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jan 19, 2010 - 3:23PM #18
StephenK.Adams
Posts: 1,472

My comments from a previous post:


So, all these dead people came back to life and were seen by many in the Holy city and not another word is mentioned about them by any other writer in the Bible!!  Nobody asked them what Heaven was like, or what lies beyond the grave???????   So lets have enough of your evasive tactics he-man, just give me, and the other people reading these submissions, a simple yes or no answer.  Do you believe that this story from Mathew is irrational?


YES OR NO.


From he-man


Yes


My response


Not withstanding the ambiguities involved in translating from various other languages into the language of the present Bible, it is not our fault that these ambiguities occur.  But to use these ambiguities to try to find reasons why these Mathew versus should be explained away does not cut it with me; or, I would confidently say, with any other person who looks at this situation rationally.


Since you agree that the Matthew versus represent irrationality, and since you appear to be a student of research; wouldn't it become self-evident to a person of your intellectual stature that for you to embrace a belief system that accepts as fact that which clearly is irrational; that such a situation should leave you with no alternative but to reject the basic tenets of this religion, (Christianity), as being superstitious in nature and below the intellectual powers that you have accumulated during your lifetime?    


 

We have nothing to fear except our lack of understanding of fear itself.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jan 19, 2010 - 3:35PM #19
he-man
Posts: 3,869

Jan 19, 2010 -- 3:23PM, StephenK.Adams wrote:


My comments from a previous post:


So, all these dead people came back to life and were seen by many in the Holy city and not another word is mentioned about them by any other writer in the Bible!!  Nobody asked them what Heaven was like, or what lies beyond the grave???????   So lets have enough of your evasive tactics he-man, just give me, and the other people reading these submissions, a simple yes or no answer.  Do you believe that this story from Mathew is irrational?


YES OR NO.


Jan 17, 2010 -- 6:27PM, he-man wrote:

Yes, and he went into the Holy City--that city where He, had been condemned, present to many.
The NIV, ESV, RSV, NASB, says "They" not "He" I will stick with "He" went to Jerusalem, the Holy City to be present with many believers, which is to say not everybody. The word "they" or "He" is not in the MSS (see the Greek below)


Paul's argument in Col 2.15:" And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross." MIGHT find a reference to this 'public' display of the resurrection power of Jesus and as part of the enlivening of the dry bones in Ezek 37.


See also the Davidic Messiah (see Ezek 37:24-25) bringing about this raising of the dead.
At Masada, where Jewish Zealots made their last stand against the Roman armies in AD 73, in the floor of the synagogue were found fragments of a scroll on which was written Ezekiel's account of his vision of the raising of the dead bones.


Ezek 37:12-13 may be the key passage behind Matt's description both in this line and in what follows, for it offers the only opening of tombs (as distinct from the simple raising of the dead)
[www.Christian-thinktank.com] From the Greek MSS:
Mt 27:52 ┬ και τα μνημια ανεωχθησαν και πολλα σωματα των κεκοιμημενων αγιων ηγερθησαν  and the sepulchers were opened, and many bodies of the saints being asleep, awoke; see 1Th 4:14
53  και εξελθοντες εκ των μνημιων μετα την εγερσιν αυτου εις την αγιαν πολιν ενεφανισθησαν πολλοις
and they came out of the sepulchers after his resurrection, and he went into the Holy City, present to many.


Isa 26:19  Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
1Co 15:20  But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
A quote from an old Timer: "We must not covet to be wise above what is written"


And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.


But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection. Rev 20:4,5



My response


Not withstanding the ambiguities involved in translating from various other languages into the language of the present Bible, it is not our fault that these ambiguities occur.  But to use these ambiguities to try to find reasons why these Mathew versus should be explained away does not cut it with me; or, I would confidently say, with any other person who looks at this situation rationally.


Since you agree that the Matthew versus represent irrationality, and since you appear to be a student of research; wouldn't it become self-evident to a person of your intellectual stature that for you to embrace a belief system that accepts as fact that which clearly is irrational; that such a situation should leave you with no alternative but to reject the basic tenets of this religion, (Christianity), as being superstitious in nature and below the intellectual powers that you have accumulated during your lifetime?  


Yes, I agree your response is irrational and he went into the Holy City--that city where He, had been condemned, present to many.


I do not think that Mt 27 is irrational as I explained above.

1Ch 25:5  All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer (chozeh= to see) in the words of God, to lift up the horn.
Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Jan 19, 2010 - 4:00PM #20
StephenK.Adams
Posts: 1,472

From he-man


While this mythological information is available today via translated Babylonian cuneiform text taken from day tablets, it was not as readily available at the time of the Latin translation of the Bible.


Thus, early so-called Christian tradition interperted the passage as a reference to the moment a demoniac  being was thrown from heaven. Lucifer became another name for a mythological Satan and has remained so due to so-called Christian dogma and popular tradition.

From he-man


While this mythological information is available today via translated Babylonian cuneiform text taken from day tablets, it was not as readily available at the time of the Latin translation of the Bible.


Thus, early so-called Christian tradition interperted the passage as a reference to the moment a demoniac  being was thrown from heaven. Lucifer became another name for a mythological Satan and has remained so due to so-called Christian dogma and popular tradition.

Jan 17, 2010 -- 6:27PM, he-man wrote:

From he-man  


My response


And you expect young people of today to embrace a religious belief system that embraces this kind of mythic and superstitious nonsense.   I will give Christianity this; they have purged much of their violent behavior towards those who do not accept their mytholigical beliefs. 


On the other hand, Islam still believes that they are duty bound to FORCE people to accept their belief system.  They do so in the belief that, even though they might have to kill one billion people before they "enlighten" the rest of the human race into accepting their belief system, they believe that ultimately the world will be better off once Islam is in full control all over the world.


What Islam and other such religons do not seem to realize is that unless you can attract people to your belief system voluntarily; if you must resort to force, no matter how you trick yourself into believing it is the right thing to do, in reality you are proving that your belief system is flawed at the core.  Human nature being what it is, any forced belief system will never reach the level of supremacy that ythose putting it forth dream of.  


***************************************


My response to your reference to Mathew 27, Versus 52 and 53


I am duly impressed, he-man, with the massive amount of knowledge that you can bring to bear upon the possible foundation and/or meaning for these Matthes verses.  I can also see that you have spent a great deal of time convincing yourself of the value to this belief system.


But no amount of time can change an irrational statement into a rational one.  The human race thought that the world was flat up until about 500 years ago.  But the truth isn't interested in how much time is spent believing something that is false.  Time itself cannot make a falsehood become the truth.  Only increased knowledge can change a falsehood into the truth.


I  am sure that it must be disconcerting to you to think that you have spent so much of your time defending a system that is indefenseable as to its mythical origins.  With the fine intellect that you have acquired, it would be in your interest to try to adopt a belief system that is more in keeping with the realities of life in accordance with the increased knowledge that we have gained over the centuries, that was not available to those who founded the Christian fable.


If you have surmised that I am refering to the Religion Of Truth, then you have surmised correctly.  This is your invitation to bring your belief system up to date and as I say in the introduction to this religion, accept a belief system that does everything possible to divest itself of all superstitous and mythical beliefs.     


 


 

We have nothing to fear except our lack of understanding of fear itself.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 4  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook