« First « Previous Comments 243 - 282 of 297 Next » Last » Search these comments
A question which a rational person can ask is - why should we believe in Jesus and not Osiris?
This is a rational question.
The simple answer is that Jesus keeps His promises. No other source can make this claim.
Acts
5 The next day the rulers, the elders and the teachers of the law met in Jerusalem. 6 Annas the high priest was there, and so were Caiaphas, John, Alexander and others of the high priest’s family. 7 They had Peter and John brought before them and began to question them: “By what power or what name did you do this?†8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: “Rulers and elders of the people! 9 If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a man who was lame and are being asked how he was healed, 10 then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. 11 Jesus is “‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the cornerstone.’
12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.â€
13 When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.
Psalm 18:30
God's way is perfect. All the LORD's promises prove true. He is a shield for all who look to him for protection.
I'm a fan of his philosophy, but not a believer in His divinity.
Philosophy can only work if it is not combined with religion because religion will always corrupt and twist any philosophy no matter how good. And religion does nothing to enhance philosophy. Reason and evidence does.
No problem with me that you believe and want to tell others about it though.
I'm pretty sure that PeopleUnited would have a problem with others worshiping Buddha as a god -- and I know Buddhists don't do this, but that's not the point -- and telling others to do so as well. Yet Buddha's philosophy is at least as nice as Jesus's.
And Buddha came first, so if anyone's the copy, it's Jesus.
The real question Dan is are you willing to forgive?
Don't try to dodge the question.
So it's a good thing that this 12-year-old girl killed herself then? After all, she's in heaven with her dad, and her mom should just kill herself too, so that she can be with her husband a child, right?
Or are you saying this 12-year-old girl is burning in hell right now?
There are two kinds of people in heaven, the innocent, and the forgiven.
God created hell as a place for the devil and his angels, but there is one kind of person who will go there as well, the guilty.
Was she innocent, forgiven or guilty? God only knows.
But again, only someone who lacks understanding of what forgiveness is would have a problem with this event, or the words of the former Google employee.
The simple answer is that Jesus keeps His promises. No other source can make this claim.
We do not know this more about Jesus than Osiris (e.i why should we believe claim about Jesus and not Osiris)
There are pieces of truth in the teachings you have cited.
I feel the same about Jesus. I'm a fan of his philosophy, but not a believer in His divinity. No problem with me that you believe and want to tell others about it though.
I feel the same about Jesus. I'm a fan of his philosophy, but not a believer in His divinity. No problem with me that you believe and want to tell others about it though.
+1000000000
Thanks @Patrick and @drBu. You are evidence that civility can exist in the midst of disagreement.
Unfortunately totalitarian thinking is what dominates our universities, many corporations, and religious institutions. Each group seeks to control thoughts and punish those who dare question the dominant paradigm. It is the new slavery. A slavery of the mind. By the power of these organizations, people are chained to live inside the ideology of that organization. You are banished to live without a job, a church family, or a degree if you are not willing to bow to the narrative of those in power. These trends are actually accelerating.
civility can exist in the midst of disagreement
If we are not trying to force our beliefs on others, then there is no reason to be vile in discussions. A polite discussion will make all of us more knowledgeable.
The simple answer is that Jesus keeps His promises. No other source can make this claim.
We do not know this more about Jesus than Osiris (e.i why should we believe claim about Jesus and not Osiris)
You should test it and see for yourself. Most people never really allow God's word a chance. Read the Bible check out Osiris and then you can decide. There is no shame in studying something and allowing yourself the opportunity to discover something new. I would suggest that seeking out someone who can share their experience/relationship with God may also be worthwhile but not necessary.
civility can exist in the midst of disagreement
If we are not trying to force our beliefs on others, then there is no reason to be vile in discussions. A polite discussion will make all of us more knowledgeable.
Well said my friend.
Dan and his tangents. Using tragedy of a confused little girl to promote his socialist agenda. You are despicable at times Dan.
And illogical. For example.
I'll tell you what my banning of your ass is really like. Imagine if I went into a church during mass, walked up to the podium, and started stating all the reasons why Christianity is bullshit and its god does not exist. I'd be kicked out immediately, the police would arrest me for trespassing, and I'd be given a police order to never return to that church under punishment of arrest. Unless you are for atheists being allowed to disrupt masses with speeches on why the Christian god is false, you are a complete hypocrite.
Dan, this is a discussion forum, not a church service. People don't come here to sit in a pew and listen to you. The come here to share ideas and receive feedback. You are so full of yourself to think people come here to listen to you like you are some kind of priest. Your analogy is more evidence of how you fail to understand what even this website is about.
God only knows.
You are still dodging the question because it clearly demonstrates an unequivocal downside to the lie of the afterlife.
Dan and his tangents. Using tragedy of a confused little girl to promote his socialist agenda. You are despicable at times Dan.
Bullshit. What is despicable is continuing to lie about an afterlife after this tragedy. That would be like taking no action after 9/11 to stop terrorism.
The entire point of history is to learn from the mistakes of the past and to not repeat them. There is a lesson to be learned from this tragedy, and that lesson is to not brainwash children into believing in a false afterlife.
If the afterlife was real, then this would not be a tragedy. So FortWayne, I ask you the same questions.
So it's a good thing that this 12-year-old girl killed herself then? After all, she's in heaven with her dad, and her mom should just kill herself too, so that she can be with her husband a child, right?
Or are you saying this 12-year-old girl is burning in hell right now?
Man up and answer those questions or stop brainwashing people with your despicable religion and lies of an afterlife.
Perception of reality matters because people act on that perception even when it is false.
The wisdom you have shared is appreciated.
What a liar. In other words, other religions are bullshit, including Zoroastrianism which had the savior thing in it, centuries before Christ.
So the next lines are ...
Jesus however, was not influenced by anything other than His relationship with His heavenly father and the Holy Spirit, His experience on earth as a human, and the Word of God which he meditated on. Jesus was not a capable of lying and if He thought people should study some other source of wisdom than the Bible He would have said so.
Yes, Patrick and others, your ideas are BS. Only PU's Christian ideas are true, because he'd been channeling spiritual entities, just like Paul, back in the time. Remember, Paul had never met Jesus... it was a vision, during his collapse on the road to Damascus.
You see, ppl like PU pray and meditate and then this entity, pretending to be a bearded man, appears in front of them, giving him the truth.
Sorry PU, but aside from your channeling experiences, you can't corroborate anything you're saying.
Bullshit. What is despicable is continuing to lie about an afterlife after this tragedy. That would be like taking no action after 9/11 to stop terrorism.
This has nothing to do with 9/11, there is no parallel. You are just going off on tangents again showing how your hatred blinded your reality.
This has nothing to do with 9/11, there is no parallel.
The parallel is that religious beliefs cause people to behave irrationally. Religious brainwashing of children causes them to lose a gripe on reality that persists into adulthood.
civility can exist in the midst of disagreement.
Practice what you preach.
Dan you happen to be the most uncivil person posting on this thread. When you pull the beam out of your eye... we can talk.
The wisdom you have shared is appreciated.
What a liar. In other words, other religions are bullshit, including Zoroastrianism which had the savior thing in it, centuries before Christ.
So the next lines are ...
Jesus however, was not influenced by anything other than His relationship with His heavenly father and the Holy Spirit, His experience on earth as a human, and the Word of God which he meditated on. Jesus was not a capable of lying and if He thought people should study some other source of wisdom than the Bible He would have said so.
Yes, Patrick and others,
Rin, I sincerely appreciate truth no matter who said it. And I sincerely despise lies which is what it would be to equate Jesus with a man who learned from Zen teachers. So I appreciate any truth you have to share. But the gist of your message is that you are pissed about someone having faith that you don't understand. I'm not asking you to like it, but I would ask you to consider what you will say to God when you meet Him.
God only knows.
You are still dodging the question because it clearly demonstrates an unequivocal downside to the lie of the afterlife.
The only downside to the afterlife is for those who are guilty.
But the gist of your message is that you are pissed about someone having faith that you don't understand. I'm not asking you to like it, but I would ask you to consider what you will say to God when you meet Him.
Actually, I think that it's you who knows shit.
And no, I'm not afraid of dying at the age of [ 80 to whenever ] and meeting those entities in the so-called "light".
Christians, like New Agers, are also channeling entities and these things have fooled countless humans including you.
The only downside to the afterlife is for those who are guilty.
You're guilty of drooling self-righteousness.
Cut/Paste for others on this thread. I'm done with this boring discussion.
--------------------
Many centuries before Christianity, the ancient Persians (READ: Not Muslim, but Zoroastrian) had an Avestan term for Savior, the Saoshyant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saoshyant
And then, in their own 'Book of Revelations', ok, it wasn't called that before the Roman Empire ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frashokereti
Excerpt: "At the end of the "third time" (the first being the age of creation, the second of mixture, and the third of separation), there will be a great battle between the forces of good (the yazatas) and those of evil (the daevas) in which the good will triumph. On earth, the Saoshyant will bring about a resurrection of the dead in the bodies they had before they died. This is followed by a last judgment through ordeal. The yazatas Airyaman and Atar will melt the metal in the hills and mountains, and the molten metal will then flow across the earth like a river. All mankind—both the living and the resurrected dead—will be required to wade through that river, but for the righteous (ashavan) it will seem to be a river of warm milk, while the wicked will be burned."
The only downside to the afterlife is for those who are guilty.
So you're saying that 12-year-old girl's suicide has no downside? Wow, that's a crappy thing to say.
Actually, I think that it's you who knows shit.
And no, I'm not afraid of dying at the age of [ 80 to whenever ] and meeting those entities in the so-called "light".
Could you elaborate? I don't catch your meaning or reasoning?
Could you elaborate? I don't catch your meaning or reasoning?
Of course, because you don't know the truth. And thus, I don't have to explain it to you.
Remember, even Christians say ... it's about faith. If it can't perceive it then you're not ready for it.
The only downside to the afterlife is for those who are guilty.
You're guilty of drooling self-righteousness.
Do you mean to imply that I claim to have my own righteousness? Not so. I have no misunderstanding about it. My only chance is forgiveness.
What does your accusation say about you?
Could you elaborate? I don't catch your meaning or reasoning?
Of course, because you don't know the truth. And thus, I don't have to explain it to you.
Remember, even Christians say ... it's about faith. If it can't perceive it then you're not ready for it.
I still don't follow you, at what point would you feel the need to "explain it to you"?
What does faith mean to you?
The only downside to the afterlife is for those who are guilty.
So you're saying that 12-year-old girl's suicide has no downside? Wow, that's a crappy thing to say.
That is not what I said. Her death is a tragic. Just as the death of those protestors this week. Unfortunately humans do tragic things. In fact, you may unknowingly have caused the death of someone. That would be tragic too. My comment was about the afterlife, the only downside to the afterlife is that most people choose to die in their sins.
Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership.
Gentle Reader,
Differences in gender traits could explain the absence of an approx 50% representation in tech and leadership. Sure. Still, I'd have been very careful about expressing any opinion like that to my mother. She had a PhD in Mathematics and worked in the computer field for nearly 30 years. I really wish she was still alive. I KNOW she would have very sweetly and deftly torn this Google engineer's ears off if he didn't have hard-nosed research to back this up. Peer-reviewed and published research.
Regards,
Roidy
The only downside to the afterlife is for those who are guilty.
So you're saying that 12-year-old girl's suicide has no downside? Wow, that's a crappy thing to say.
That is not what I said. Her death is a tragic.
It's only tragic if there is no afterlife. Clearly deep down either you don't believe it's a tragedy that she committed suicide or you don't believe in heaven. You can't have it both ways. If she's in paradise experiencing eternal bliss with her father, it's not a tragedy. That's why the afterlife myth is so stupid. It tries to take the sting out of death and fails while taking the meaning out of life.
The only downside to the afterlife is for those who are guilty.
So you're saying that 12-year-old girl's suicide has no downside? Wow, that's a crappy thing to say.
That is not what I said. Her death is a tragic.
It's only tragic if there is no afterlife. Clearly deep down either you don't believe it's a tragedy that she committed suicide or you don't believe in heaven. You can't have it both ways. If she's in paradise experiencing eternal bliss with her father, it's not a tragedy. That's why the afterlife myth is so stupid. It tries to take the sting out of death and fails while taking the meaning out of life.
You are wrong again as usual. Her death is tragic. No one ever wants to see a child die. That is the tragedy. It is always preferable to live a long productive life, then die and go to heaven. It is tragic also that you fail to recognize this. Your lack of understanding is on full display once again.
You are wrong again as usual. Her death is tragic. No one ever wants to see a child die. That is the tragedy.
Then why does your god allow children to die of cancer and other diseases?
It is always preferable to live a long productive life, then die and go to heaven.
No, actually, it wouldn't be if heaven or hell were real. There is nothing in a mortal life that would warrant risking the loss of eternal happiness or the infliction of eternal torture. If either heaven or hell were real, nonetheless both, it would be a moral imperative to kill all babies before they were old enough to sin and risk their immortal souls. It would be damn evil to allow their souls to be jeopardized.
The fact that you don't believe it's more moral to kill babies than to allow them to live indisputably proves that deep down inside, you know everything about your religion and the afterlife is a lie.
This is why religion needs to be opposed. If people act on the lies of religion, they do the wrong thing. They make decisions based on incorrect information, and that means they make bad decisions.
You cannot have it both ways. If you want to remove the sting of death with the lie of eternal life, then you remove the importance of staying alive as well.
You are wrong again as usual. Her death is tragic. No one ever wants to see a child die. That is the tragedy.
Then why does your god allow children to die of cancer and other diseases?
Death is a result of the curse of sin. Unfortunately no human, including children are immune to the curse.
It is always preferable to live a long productive life, then die and go to heaven.
No, actually, it wouldn't be if heaven or hell were real. There is nothing in a mortal life that would warrant risking the loss of eternal happiness or the infliction of eternal torture. If either heaven or hell were real, nonetheless both, it would be a moral imperative to kill all babies before they were old enough to sin and risk their immortal souls. It would be damn evil to allow their souls to be jeopardized.
Actually it is a moral imperative NOT TO kill babies, which is why Christians speak out on the evil of abortion. You may have read the 10 commandments? There is one regarding murder. It is a true moral imperative.
It is not moral to kill someone in hopes of sending them to heaven. You are either being daft or simply have no concept of true morality.
You cannot have it both ways. If you want to remove the sting of death with the lie of eternal life, then you remove the importance of staying alive as well.
Again you demonstrate your lack of knowledge or even basic logic. The time you spend on this earth IS important. It is time to decide to serve God or go your own way. It is time to use the gifts God has given you to serve Him. God gives us a choice. That is why life is so precious, it is the time you have to make your choice. After death there are no choices to be made. This life is the only opportunity you will have to accept or reject the purpose for which you were created.
Right now, as we type and read and go about our lives, God is preparing a place for those who have accepted Him as their Savior. The mere presence of Heaven however does not lessen the importance of life on earth. In fact, as I mentioned above the importance of staying alive is increased by the reality of Heaven. Every person should strive to teach others to make the right choice regarding God, and that is why this life IS SO IMPORTANT. When you are dead, your opportunity to do God's will is ended.
The Lord wants all humans to go to Heaven, but He wants them to decide if that is what they want. In Heaven people will be worshiping God all the time, for eternity. If people are not interested in doing that here, they won't find Heaven to their liking either. That is why God gives us a choice.
Joshua Chapter 14 "And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.â€
This life is the only opportunity you will have to accept or reject the purpose for which you were created.
Says the infant who'd died of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.
That's right, he was able to determine if this nasty faux spiritual entity was GOD and not some so-called demon, pretending to be him.
Dan, I know you don't believe this, but ppl like PU are channelers. They have these energetic entities attached to them, pretending to be emissaries of GOD and then, they develop these self-righteous attitudes believing that they'd trumped ppl like you.
In time, scientists will discover their true nature and wipe 'em out,
You don't believe in god and evil
Therefore your claim of evil on this subject is worthless and hypocritical Dan.
Death is a result of the curse of sin.
Then your god is evil.
« First « Previous Comments 243 - 282 of 297 Next » Last » Search these comments
Woohoo! There is a small break in the dam holding back scientific truth about gender.
http://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320
And some delightful nuggets of truth which have so far been repressed by shaming, straw-man exaggerations, and even firing of anyone with the balls to speak: