I was listening to this man and what he says is so truthful even to us who claim to be Christians. He made me see the hypocrisy of my thinking. I do it here and I live it in my life. I claim to be Christian but I don't practice what Jesus told us to do, love our enemies (even if it is hard). So what if what they post and preach to us goes against the grain of our beliefs, they are still created by God and we should not judge them. Tell them that they're wrong but don't be ready to send them to hell even if what they post and what they believe seems to be coming from Satan himself. Love them and leave the judging to Jesus Himself as we aren't qualified. Sure, we can tell them that they're heading in the wrong path but still if they needed you to help you couldn't deny it because their thoughts aren't your thoughts. I think you'll like this video and the best part it isn't a long one, sometimes our posts are longer than this video. Stay to the end and let me know what you thought of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6_ESSfyiYE

ollie, I know this isn't directed at me ... however, this guy is over-the-top emotional about objectivity vs. historical anomalies within humanity and the results of such ... so, Ja, the contradiction defies the value of ignoring the real existence as we exist today ... therefore, it doesn't matter if it's today, or yesterday, or since the beginning of man ... we simply evolve based on the current construct as it presents itself...

I'm a firm believer of respecting "faith" as long as violence isn't any portion of the equation ... I know in this epidermis; I exist within a speck of time that is nothing more than the standards defined by the hierarchy and bloodshed that has evolved throughout history...

we may define ourselves as mammals with intelligence, however, it's nothing but another word/term/standard in my mind....

do you remember, "puppies that go woofy woof"? or "back the dog in the corner"? there's a consequence to gathering information and how it progresses moving forward ... this is nothing new just b/c we're breathing what the trees provide...

all I see is good vs. ill-trained vs. the rest ... in my reality and readings/teachings, that's all I've ever witnessed ... it's how I learned to survive within the 'threes'...

"if there's one thing I've learned floating thru existence, one can never lie to thine." - A. Theist

take it fwiw - it matters not - your faith in belief(s) is all one can control ... it's how one dispenses that defines the soul ...

Ha, ha, you say that it's not directed at you but it seems that it did hit a nerve because while it wasn't meant for you it did conjure up a response. It's funny that some people (not saying you directly) believe that there is a devil, an evil one or in a word, Satan. But at the same time don't believe in the man-God that saved us from our sin by sacrificing himself on the cross. In olden days (Old Testament) a pure lamb was brought to the priests to be sacrifice for their sins and that supposedly was supposed to last for a year and the cycle continued until the next year when another lamb was brought. When Jesus said, "it is finished". He meant that His sacrifice was sufficient for all eternity and no lamb were needed anymore. His blood was given to rid us of sin and that was until the end of time, for ever. It's a hard concept to accept when one doesn't want to believe. I know it was for me but I didn't know the God of the Bible until later in life. My only regret is that I didn't learn this until I had led a life of perdition you might say. I knew that I was sinning but it didn't matter to me, I was having fun but at what cost. God came to me and He opened my heart to Him and I accepted Him with open arms. I'm very grateful that I finally opened my eyes for surely as there is an evil one who wants to keep you away from God, there is also the God that will give you life if you accept it and accept Him. It is up to each individual no one is the same, the ball is in your court as it is said.

ollie, my nerves are long disconnected from many versions of 'reality' ... my main point was to respond to the posit from my perspective ...

I'm a self-admitted atheist ...everybody knows that ... some choose to call me a lost soul ... do you think that really matters to me?!

I could write a book on this topic ... I'll simply stand by my original post ... it's easier on the brain if you take the context as was intended (me vs. him ... that's what you asked for)

#salud

(03-12-2022 12:48 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  ollie, my nerves are long disconnected from many versions of 'reality' ... my main point was to respond to the posit from my perspective ...

I'm a self-admitted atheist ...everybody knows that ... some choose to call me a lost soul ... do you think that really matters to me?!

I could write a book on this topic ... I'll simply stand by my original post ... it's easier on the brain if you take the context as was intended (me vs. him ... that's what you asked for)

#salud

As others have said I simply lack the blind faith to be an atheist.

The idea that the universe just blinked itself into existence and all life comes from non life is......

Well, its insane.

I don't have to dive very deep at all to know that is gonzo nuts. Its based on a much deeper desire to never be judged or held accountable to God. So it allows you to override and delude yourself to the most obvious truth there is.

There is just no way that can be spun to make it seem even remotely logical or plausible by any measure. The more one tries, the more absurd it gets.

I have to call myself agnostic. I remain unsure about much. There have been times I've prayed and then times I've wondered why or even to whom I was praying and to what end. And there have been times when I was sure that there is no God, there are only natural laws of physics and men who do unimaginable harm seemingly without consequence. Even after being raised by a very religious mother I still wonder about the existence of God as described in the bible.

I do believe there is some higher power that lends order to our universe, who or what that is remains a mystery.

(03-12-2022 08:49 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  I have to call myself agnostic. I remain unsure about much. There have been times I've prayed and then times I've wondered why or even to whom I was praying and to what end. And there have been times when I was sure that there is no God, there are only natural laws of physics and men who do unimaginable harm seemingly without consequence. Even after being raised by a very religious mother I still wonder about the existence of God as described in the bible.

I do believe there is some higher power that lends order to our universe, who or what that is remains a mystery.

Its really heart breaking and disappointing to hear you personally say that, TigerBlue.

I imagine you would vehemently disagree but I think Catholicism and masonry has played a big role in shaping your views on this.

Catholicism does a really poor job of teaching WHY we should believe in Jesus over any other god, it focuses on rituals and man made traditions and very little on a reasoned defense of the faith.

Catholics are practically born into catholicism and its so hard for them to break out of that mindset. It feels like a deep betrayal of the church and those people who you love. But its not.

Christianity is based on a relationship with Jesus Christ, not a particular church or denomination.

(03-12-2022 10:21 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Catholicism does a really poor job of teaching WHY we should believe in Jesus over any other god, it focuses on rituals and man made traditions and very little on a reasoned defense of the faith.

And yet, for 1000 years or more, the only people engaged in reasoned defenses of the faith were Roman Catholic apologists. Thomas Cahill's How the Irish Saved Civilization does a good job of making that point. A quick summary is at:

https://www.supersummary.com/how-the-iri...n/summary/

Excerpts in part:

"How the Irish Saved Civilization focuses specifically on the period between the collapse of Rome and the start of the Middle Ages – or, the move from the ancient classical to early medieval times. The main thesis, or thread Cahill aims to capture, is how Irish monks are responsible for preserving antiquated texts, and how these efforts are the only way ancient manuscripts survived the period."

There just aren't many of those left now, and the RC's have gotten almost totally away from their tradition. They have kept the words and names, but they don't have the same meanings. As an Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian/COE/Anglican, I lament the perhaps even greater departure from tradition into wokeness by my own denomination.

(03-11-2022 10:25 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  ollie, I know this isn't directed at me ... however, this guy is over-the-top emotional about objectivity vs. historical anomalies within humanity and the results of such ... so, Ja, the contradiction defies the value of ignoring the real existence as we exist today ... therefore, it doesn't matter if it's today, or yesterday, or since the beginning of man ... we simply evolve based on the current construct as it presents itself...

I'm a firm believer of respecting "faith" as long as violence isn't any portion of the equation ... I know in this epidermis; I exist within a speck of time that is nothing more than the standards defined by the hierarchy and bloodshed that has evolved throughout history...

we may define ourselves as mammals with intelligence, however, it's nothing but another word/term/standard in my mind....

do you remember, "puppies that go woofy woof"? or "back the dog in the corner"? there's a consequence to gathering information and how it progresses moving forward ... this is nothing new just b/c we're breathing what the trees provide...

all I see is good vs. ill-trained vs. the rest ... in my reality and readings/teachings, that's all I've ever witnessed ... it's how I learned to survive within the 'threes'...

"if there's one thing I've learned floating thru existence, one can never lie to thine." - A. Theist

take it fwiw - it matters not - your faith in belief(s) is all one can control ... it's how one dispenses that defines the soul ...

Stink,

Answer these three questions for yourself and see if they make sense to you if you even have an answer.

1. Why are you your cognizant being here in this time and space?

2. How did you your cognizant being get here?

3. Where are you your cognizant being going when you leave here?

Your mind thought process how you perceive things.

The probability of you existing at all comes out to 10^102,685,000

Nasa recently came out and said in the entire universe there may be one other planet that could sustain life. Food for thought

Your not here by happen chance. Its just not possible.

(03-12-2022 10:29 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 10:21 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Catholicism does a really poor job of teaching WHY we should believe in Jesus over any other god, it focuses on rituals and man made traditions and very little on a reasoned defense of the faith.

And yet, for 1000 years or more, the only people engaged in reasoned defenses of the faith were Roman Catholic apologists. Thomas Cahill's How the Irish Saved Civilization does a good job of making that point. A quick summary is at:

https://www.supersummary.com/how-the-iri...n/summary/

Excerpts in part:

"How the Irish Saved Civilization focuses specifically on the period between the collapse of Rome and the start of the Middle Ages – or, the move from the ancient classical to early medieval times. The main thesis, or thread Cahill aims to capture, is how Irish monks are responsible for preserving antiquated texts, and how these efforts are the only way ancient manuscripts survived the period."

There just aren't many of those left now, and the RC's have gotten almost totally away from their tradition. They have kept the words and names, but they don't have the same meanings. As an Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian/COE/Anglican, I lament the perhaps even greater departure from tradition into wokeness by my own denomination.

For more than 1000 years, the RCC was really the only church that existed across much of Roman/Byzantine Empire. They squashed all others and forced conversion into Catholicism several centuries after Christ.

They would have been the only real source of Christian apologetics for quite a while. Modern Catholicism doesn't seem to put much stock in it at all, and the average catholic doesn't even know what salvation really is. Much less why we should believe in Jesus over any other God or no God at all. If someone asked them how to know how they are or can be saved most would have no answer. I have seen a ton of staunch Catholics admit to that. To say its stunning is the understatement of the millennium.

A sound defense and reason for the faith are far more vital in modern times than ever before. The level of deception today, plus the countless gods to choose from, its more important than ever to understand WHY we believe what we believe.

(03-12-2022 10:42 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  A sound defense and reason for the faith are far more vital in modern times than ever before. The level of deception today, plus the countless gods to choose from, its more important than ever to understand WHY we believe what we believe.

I have posted my view of salvation as a three part process--justification, sanctification, and glorification--and I believe you have agreed. That formulation comes almost directly from the writings of Peter Kreeft, who is one of the few modern Roman Catholic apologists. But his church--and mine--have wandered far afield from that in efforts to become trendy and modern. We need to get back to the basics.

(03-12-2022 10:57 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 10:42 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  A sound defense and reason for the faith are far more vital in modern times than ever before. The level of deception today, plus the countless gods to choose from, its more important than ever to understand WHY we believe what we believe.

I have posted my view of salvation as a three part process--justification, sanctification, and glorification--and I believe you have agreed. That formulation comes almost directly from the writings of Peter Kreeft, who is one of the few modern Roman Catholic apologists. But his church--and mine--have wandered far afield from that in efforts to become trendy and modern. We need to get back to the basics.

We absolutely agree, but to be more specific it comes directly from the Bible. That's the real basis of it, because its Biblical based doctrine.

And its not hard to see in scripture, it gets hard when man made traditions and doctrines of denominations get in the way. A lot of people end up trying to make scripture fit within their denomination, as opposed to fitting their understanding around scripture itself. And that is really hard and confusing.

When you read the NT separate of denominational chains, that basic doctrine becomes much clearer.

(03-12-2022 11:13 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 10:57 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 10:42 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  A sound defense and reason for the faith are far more vital in modern times than ever before. The level of deception today, plus the countless gods to choose from, its more important than ever to understand WHY we believe what we believe.

I have posted my view of salvation as a three part process--justification, sanctification, and glorification--and I believe you have agreed. That formulation comes almost directly from the writings of Peter Kreeft, who is one of the few modern Roman Catholic apologists. But his church--and mine--have wandered far afield from that in efforts to become trendy and modern. We need to get back to the basics.

We absolutely agree, but to be more specific it comes directly from the Bible. That's the real basis of it, because its Biblical based doctrine.
And its not hard to see in scripture, it gets hard when man made traditions and doctrines of denominations get in the way. A lot of people end up trying to make scripture fit within their denomination, as opposed to fitting their understanding around scripture itself. And that is really hard and confusing.
When you read the NT separate of denominational chains, that basic doctrine becomes much clearer.

I agree. My only point was that Kreeft, an RC, is who first stated it so directly to me.

Actually, I find a lot to agree with in Kreeft's writings. Far more than with the current Pope.

(03-12-2022 12:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 11:13 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 10:57 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 10:42 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  A sound defense and reason for the faith are far more vital in modern times than ever before. The level of deception today, plus the countless gods to choose from, its more important than ever to understand WHY we believe what we believe.

I have posted my view of salvation as a three part process--justification, sanctification, and glorification--and I believe you have agreed. That formulation comes almost directly from the writings of Peter Kreeft, who is one of the few modern Roman Catholic apologists. But his church--and mine--have wandered far afield from that in efforts to become trendy and modern. We need to get back to the basics.

We absolutely agree, but to be more specific it comes directly from the Bible. That's the real basis of it, because its Biblical based doctrine.
And its not hard to see in scripture, it gets hard when man made traditions and doctrines of denominations get in the way. A lot of people end up trying to make scripture fit within their denomination, as opposed to fitting their understanding around scripture itself. And that is really hard and confusing.
When you read the NT separate of denominational chains, that basic doctrine becomes much clearer.

I agree. My only point was that Kreeft, an RC, is who first stated it so directly to me.

Actually, I find a lot to agree with in Kreeft's writings.

There are countless videos where Catholic priests admit that in their church tradition overrides the Bible. It's not hard to find, you'll find them on Youtube.

(03-12-2022 04:32 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  There are countless videos where Catholic priests admit that in their church tradition overrides the Bible. It's not hard to find, you'll find them on Youtube.

I have been telling people for years you must study for yourself what the actual message Jesus taught in the NT. Man made traditions are in every religion and it is up to us to question or confirm whether sound doctrine is being taught. Many are led astray by these so called teachers. Remember while everyone is guarding the front door Satan slips in the back door.

(03-12-2022 08:53 PM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 04:32 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  There are countless videos where Catholic priests admit that in their church tradition overrides the Bible. It's not hard to find, you'll find them on Youtube.

I have been telling people for years you must study for yourself what the actual message Jesus taught in the NT. Man made traditions are in every religion and it is up to us to question or confirm whether sound doctrine is being taught. Many are led astray by these so called teachers. Remember while everyone is guarding the front door Satan slips in the back door.

AMEN

I often point out the RCC because its by far the largest denomination of all. And it seems to place less importance on the Word of God than almost any other major denomination.

But that does not mean protestant denominations do not also cloud peoples views with their denominational chains as well. They absolutely do.

Protestants are more likely to study the Bible in a serious manner though.

(03-12-2022 08:57 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 08:53 PM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 04:32 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  There are countless videos where Catholic priests admit that in their church tradition overrides the Bible. It's not hard to find, you'll find them on Youtube.

I have been telling people for years you must study for yourself what the actual message Jesus taught in the NT. Man made traditions are in every religion and it is up to us to question or confirm whether sound doctrine is being taught. Many are led astray by these so called teachers. Remember while everyone is guarding the front door Satan slips in the back door.

AMEN

I often point out the RCC because its by far the largest denomination of all. And it seems to place less importance on the Word of God than almost any other major denomination.

But that does not mean protestant denominations do not also cloud peoples views with their denominational chains as well. They absolutely do.

Protestants are more likely to study the Bible in a serious manner though.

What denomination are you?

(03-12-2022 08:57 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 08:53 PM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(03-12-2022 04:32 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  There are countless videos where Catholic priests admit that in their church tradition overrides the Bible. It's not hard to find, you'll find them on Youtube.

I have been telling people for years you must study for yourself what the actual message Jesus taught in the NT. Man made traditions are in every religion and it is up to us to question or confirm whether sound doctrine is being taught. Many are led astray by these so called teachers. Remember while everyone is guarding the front door Satan slips in the back door.

AMEN

I often point out the RCC because its by far the largest denomination of all. And it seems to place less importance on the Word of God than almost any other major denomination.

But that does not mean protestant denominations do not also cloud peoples views with their denominational chains as well. They absolutely do.

Protestants are more likely to study the Bible in a serious manner though.

I would strongly suggest you use texts which are 1948 or older as all after 1960 have political agendas baked into the translations, or worse paraphrases.

The original KJV used Latin translations used by the RCC and had a Royalist bias. The Leningrad Codex, the Vulgate and the Dead Sea Scrolls (at least most of them) and a working knowledge of Latin, Greek, and Aramaic will help you. Study of the customs of ancient Israelite and the custom of the surrounding Canaanite tribes as this will help with interpretation as well. Things which seem obscure can often easily be recognized if you know the customs of those cultures. If you use Lexicons you need to go back prior to 1948 for the same reasons. At seminaries you need to go to the archives section of the libraries to search for these books. Lexicons, alleged studies on ancient cultures, and interpretations of words and meanings have all been altered for political and sometimes denominational reasons since 1948, and the modern commentaries based on them as well. The truest materials are now in the archives and in some seminaries locked unless a professor clears you.

A mild example would be the Hebrew for "to kill". Three words exist. One means murder and manslaughter and it is the one used in the 10 commandments. Another is used for life taken in combat for your nation (tribe) or self defense. The third for executions. The last two are not the words used in the 10 commandments. I've known many a Veteran who labored under a sense of condemnation because this is not taught, my father was among them.

The more severe I won't discuss here and I think you can figure some of them out.

And we aren't even dealing with how it was pieced together and why.

Just some things to consider for those seeking truth.

(03-13-2022 12:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  I would strongly suggest you use texts which are 1948 or older as all after 1960 have political agendas baked into the translations, or worse paraphrases.

The original KJV used Latin translations used by the RCC and had a Royalist bias. The Leningrad Codex, the Vulgate and the Dead Sea Scrolls (at least most of them) and a working knowledge of Latin, Greek, and Aramaic will help you. Study of the customs of ancient Israelite and the custom of the surrounding Canaanite tribes as this will help with interpretation as well. Things which seem obscure can often easily be recognized if you know the customs of those cultures. If you use Lexicons you need to go back prior to 1948 for the same reasons. At seminaries you need to go to the archives section of the libraries to search for these books. Lexicons, alleged studies on ancient cultures, and interpretations of words and meanings have all been altered for political and sometimes denominational reasons since 1948, and the modern commentaries based on them as well. The truest materials are now in the archives and in some seminaries locked unless a professor clears you.

A mild example would be the Hebrew for "to kill". Three words exist. One means murder and manslaughter and it is the one used in the 10 commandments. Another is used for life taken in combat for your nation (tribe) or self defense. The third for executions. The last two are not the words used in the 10 commandments. I've known many a Veteran who labored under a sense of condemnation because this is not taught, my father was among them.

The more severe I won't discuss here and I think you can figure some of them out.

And we aren't even dealing with how it was pieced together and why.

Just some things to consider for those seeking truth.

As someone who had studied the Greek and Hebrew texts along side multiple English translations, none of that is really an issue for me.

God did not write His Word in a vacuum, the plan before the world was made was for it to be translated into multiple languages across the entire earth, particularly in the latter days. He never expected people to HAVE to be theological experts on Canaanite culture to understand the key doctrines of the NT.

While there is no doubt clear examples where a deeper understanding of those cultures can bring deeper understanding to light (as well as a serious study of Hebrew and Greek), there is not one single key Christian doctrine that is dependent solely upon knowing any of those things.

The NT text is clearly designed to break past the language barriers by repeating and expounding on all key NT doctrines throughout the NT to pierce though any such losses in translation on vital doctrine. One of the most basic examples of this is that most of the NT books are written by Paul specifically to the Gentile Churches across Asian Minor who had a very limited understanding of the OT law and those other cultures. They were converted pagans from completely different cultures.

Its purposely written and designed to simplify and explain those key doctrines on a level that anyone from anywhere in the world can comprehend through careful study. Even for people on the other side of the planet living thousands of years later. That was God's intention from before He made the world.

For instance the example you point to about the translation of "to kill" and peoples struggle with that issue, the NT teaches that those sins are forgiven though Christ and the cross. So though a person can wrestle with that, in the end the most important point is that we are forgiven of those sins through the blood of Christ on the cross. All that is required is faith and genuine repentance. If a person is taught that our sins are remitted by the blood of Christ, then a perfect understanding of Hebrew is not even needed. If they don't fully understand or accept the doctrine of the remittance of our sins though Jesus, then they can obsessively struggle with exact meaning and exact translation of "to kill" or something similar.

So yes I fully agree learning of those things gives you a deeper understanding, but they are not vital to understanding key NT doctrines as a Christian. If you just study the entire NT, whatever translations issues crop up can be worked out by examining that doctrine in other parts of the NT and comparing them. And not limiting yourself to one single translation.