Denial of the Holy Spirit and Why Christian Conversion is Useless.
Offline
I watched “The God Who Wasn't There” for the first time today. I know, I should have watched it a long time ago, but I never really got around to it. I decided to get it yesterday because I am tired of my friends talking about Zeitgeist and I've heard over and over again that TGWWT is about the same subject and infinitely better. When I watched it, it didn't tell me much that I didn't know, but it was very good at telling it to me. I very much enjoy the soundtrack, especially the “this is just a simulation” track.
The thing that stood out to me the most was Flemming's account of his childhood attending his private Catholic school. He pointed out the two verses that talk about the unforgivable sin of denying the Holy Spirit and how, as a child, he was terrified that he had accidentally done that before. Christians doubt all the time, especially the Holy Spirit. These two verses say that if you ever believe that there is no Holy Spirit, it's game over. No second chances. If you've ever believed there is no Holy Spirit, you're going straight to hell.
This means that there are beaucoups of people who profess to be Christians, have previously doubted the validity of the Holy Spirit, and are now unwittingly condemned to hell. They unknowingly continue their obedience to god. Maybe this is why prayers are so rarely answered: anyone who has ever been skeptical about their religion is automatically doomed to hell!
This leads to my point. Any non-Christians that are old enough to have considered the possibility of the Holy Spirit and denied the existence of it (which constituted the majority of non-Christian people), are permanently doomed to hell. Therefore, any attempts to convert these people are completely futile. Even if they do convert, they are still going to hell.
My Brand New Blog - Jesu Ad Nauseum.
God of the Gaps: As knowledge approaches infinity, God approaches zero. It's introductory calculus.
- Login to post comments
Having not seen the movie and not being sure of the particular quotes this comment could be totally meaningless but... There's a difference between doubt, disbelief and denial.
Denial requires you to make a statement of (what you consider to be) fact. doubt and disbelief are states of opinion. Even expressing doubt or disbelief may not be denial unless presented as fact rather than opinion.
There are looser definitions of deny that would include refusal to believe, even if you keep it to yourself, but at least one definition and therefore one interpretation would allow for doubt and disbelief that do not guarantee hell.
I wonder what the word is in the original language of the text. I guess that would clarify.
Oh, a lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!
2. The bible is just a prop with few lines cherry picked to suit an agenda. Nice Christians have a few lines from the Gospels, and mean christians have pretty much the whole fucking book to choose from, but usually settle on Leviticus. People like me who like to give the bible rope to watch it hang itself tend to prefer Genesis, but really, any book will do.
3. Most christians, even the most adamant defenders don't actually know what kind of crap the bible contains. Ask a christian about god's power and you're unlikely to get a response involving unicorns or a wrestling match with Jacob, or limitations with dealing with iron chariots. Also, try asking for a physical description of Jesus...
"I've yet to witness circumstance successfully manipulated through the babbling of ritualistic nonsense to an imaginary deity." -- me (josh)
If god can do anything, can he make a hot dog so big even he can't eat all of it?
You can also see the number of Christians who come here and insist that the Blasphemy Challenge isn't really denying/blaspheming the Holy Spirit.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
Maybe because it isn't. It's amazing how almost everytime and atheist opens their mouth and says something about Christians it's wrong. You'd think you'd bother knowing something about a subject before being so pridefully arrogant about your knowledge of it.. but then you wouldn't be Atheists now would ya.
Actually it is. Saying "I deny the HS" is denyint it, and saying "Fuck the HS" is blaspheming it. The Christians who say otherwise give a definition that makes doing so impossible, which would have made Jesus rather silly to mention it as the unforgivable sin.
BTW to the OP, I'm pretty sure Brian Flemming's school wasn't Catholic - it was fundie though.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
Are there puritans still around? They always had some really pleasant punishments for blasphemy as did the catholic church so perhaps they would know. Besides, as the saying goes, "blasphemy is a victimless crime".
"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS
One of the biggest problems with any major religion stems from the fact that all denominations read from the same book, claim that the holy spirit helps them interpret their text and most denominations/individuals lay claim to the truth. So.... oh mighty wise one, how do you interpret this? It's funny because there will always be another bible thumping believer behind you that believes something else.
As for arrogance, I seen none in your post. Damn did I turn the sarcasm off? You seem to be generalizing just like you claim atheists to.
"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS
"I've yet to witness circumstance successfully manipulated through the babbling of ritualistic nonsense to an imaginary deity." -- me (josh)
If god can do anything, can he make a hot dog so big even he can't eat all of it?
Now you see the difference between a Christian and a Paulist, hazindu...
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Sigh... eye roll..
As I am sure has been explained to you many times blasphamy of the Holy Spirit is ascribing the miracles of Jesus to Satan. Since you don't believe in Jesus, don't believe in miracls, don't believe in the Holy Spirit, and don't believe in Satan you can't do that.
Here is where you say, "Oh think you Christian who is more knowledgable than us. We won't be mistaken about this topic again."
Again, why wouldn't Jesus have put it that way, and why would he bother making a point of it when this would make it nearly impossible to actually do? We've answered that bullshit before numerous times.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
Hmmm... in that case:
I ascribe the purported miracles of the literary character known as "Jesus" to the literary antagonist known as "Satan"
Oh THINK, you Christian. Who is more knowledgable than us? We won't be mistaken about this topic. Again:
Oh THINK, you Christian. Who is more knowledgable than us? We won't be mistaken about this topic.
Could you please cite proper context and verse(s) for this? The denial of the HS thing is just a marketing ploy or something similiar as you are correct. Why publicly deny something you dont sincerly believe in?
"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS
Psssst! WillieBop! Got a second? Promise, this won't take long.
Stating that Jesus neither says what he means nor means what he says is not exactly a winning argument. The definitions of "blaspheme" and "deny" are pretty clear-cut, and neither of their definitions make mention of special pleading vis a vis the Holy Spirit.
Oh my Jesus.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Blasphemy as per the Merriam-Webster dictionary
1 a: the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God b: the act of claiming the attributes of deity2: irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolableDenying the Holy Spirit: Now there are a few biblical passages we can use here first off Mattew 12:28-32: Truly I say unto you, All their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter: but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin: because they say, ‘He has an unclean spirit’. Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come
There it is, we have the definition of blasphemy and the biblical passage that states that speaking against the Holy spirit cannot be forgiven. Of course the church is free to change it's mind, but that doesn't change the context of the text.
can you tell me where you got this information?
Oh and they were not saying that it was satan's doing but beelzebub, a demon in league with satan, so if you ascribe any miracles to any demons that are considered to be in league with the devil that would be considered blasphemy. No where does it state you have to believe in the devil or in demons.
The message was I am "one" with what is. Then there are those that don't get it, and so religion, idol worship. Science says all is "one", as thermodynamics. Science best explains g-o-d .... as all is ONE.
Celebrate, dance around the fire in appreciation, but don't come over to my appreciation dance camp and tell me I am doing it wrong .... fuck all you dogmists ....
Atheism Books.
Shhhhh...he's projecting. Don't tell him. I rather enjoy this all-too-common phenomenon among the theists that post here. It's funny.
Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
You can still join in the circles of friends and bask in the warmth of his Holy Truth. All you have to do is to accept Jesus Christ as your saviour. Eternity is a long time, can you really risk not to do it?
I'm an agnostic atheist who thinks you should love your neughbour.
Anyone ever told you appeals to fear really don't work here?
I have to believe your savior exists and that there is something to be saved from. So far you're missing two of those things.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Risk can objectively be calculated with probability. Given the numbers I've seen, yes, I can rationally risk not accepting Jesus as anything other than I guy I once knew from Mexico and Christ as just my sister. (That's her legal name, on her SSN card and everything. )
Given that you only have about 80 years on Earth - much of which has already passed - can you afford to risk the loss of more time devoted to superstition and delusional addiction to religion?
"I am that I am." - Proof that the writers of the bible were beyond stoned.
Yes, you can bask in the warmth of his holy truth as the friends and family who don't make it suffer in hell forever for no better reason that disbelief. The appeal to fear is so pathetic that at least you could try to hide your fear of the god you so blindly follow.
So you are saying that trusting in jesus is a requirement to get into heaven? What about people that had never heard of jesus? What about the other ancient cultures that existed at the time of the alleged moses? Wow, I don't seem to recall that they were "chosen" to be god's people and for sure the israelites weren't out to convert others into their little club.
In a nutshell, the judeo-christian god makes no rational sense. Yes, eternity is a long time but don't worry there is no evidence to suggest you'll be aware of anything after you're dead.
"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS
Fear myself, ME GOD, as all is one??? Nay, "The only thing to fear is fear itself." This is the "kingdom" NOW, eternal. "Heaven" is knowledge of reality, gnosis, eternal oneness, non separation, thermodynamics. Hell is wrong thinking, fear, separatism, dogma, unnecessary suffering.
Atheism Books.
What if you're being tricked, and you'll burn forever locked-up all by yourself in an empty room for accepting Christ as your personal savior? What if you've got it all wrong, and Satan is actually the creator, and Yahweh / Jesus are the decievers?
Moreover, what if they're ALL false idols, and the One True God (TM) is actually Bill Gates, and he's monitoring you right now to see if you've fallen for the ploy - and he sentences you on judgement day to answer customer service calls for Microsoft with no breaks for eternity?
How can you take that risk, dude! I mean, it's eternity, and that's a lot of customer service calls.
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
Hail the savior, Bill Gates, as google is God.
Your understanding of the Scriptures and of theology is very limited. If you look at the context of the passage you are refering to (Matt. 12:31-32) which is Matt.12:22-31, Jesus was healing and performing miracles. The Pharisees started accusing Jesus of casting out demons and performing miracles by the power of the Devil, or Beelzebub as the passage says.
Now that you understand the context, we can clearly see that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is claiming that Jesus performed his miracles through the power of the devil; let me explain why this is important.
In Matt. 3:15, Jesus states that his baptism was to "fulfill all righteousness." He had to be baptized in order to fulfill the OT requirements for going into the priesthood. Hence the word, fulfill. Priests offered sacrifices to God for the people's sins and Jesus came to be a sacrifice for our sins and we see this in 1 Peter 2:21 and 2 Cor 5:21. For a priest to be considered an official priest, he had to be washed with water and anointed with oil. Both happened to Jesus during his baptism.
The Holy Spirit represents the oil, Matt. 3:16. Jesus started his ministry after his baptism and he performed miracles by the power of the Holy Spirit. Now, the Pharisees knew that his miracles were evidence of Jesus ministry and they were trying to discredit him, saying that he was working with the devil.
Therefore, the Pharisees blasphemed the Holy Spirit because of their accusation of Jesus performing miracles not of the Holy Spirit but of the devil's power. This hit "the very heart of the redemptive work of God in Christ." It attacked the very nature of Jesus' redemption, testimony, and teachings. "Jesus was ministering in the power of the Holy Spirit Himself, fulfilling the divine plan of Go to provide a sacrifice for our sins (John 3:16 and 1 John 4:10). The Pharisees were attributing this to demonic activity. This is a great blasphemy."
I hope this helps. You also mentioned that there are Christians who unwillingly or unknowingly blasphemed the Holy Spirit. I have to tell you that you, sir, are wrong on that as well. A true Christian who is of God cannot lose his salvation, and therefore, cannot commit the unforgivable sin. If a "Christian" does blaspheme the Holy Spirit, than he was not truly a Christian. John 10:27-28 tells us that anyone who is of Christ, He will not lose them. 2 Cor. 5:17 tells us that He who is born again (John 3:7) is a new creation and the old is passed away. 1 John 2:19 says that those who leave Christ were never of Him to begin with.
"Professing to be wise, they became fools," - Romans 1:22
I think that we can see who is really theologically ignorant by taking other examples of blasphemy from the Bible in context.
The Hebrew word for blasphemy is nĕ'atsah, and it means to puncture when taken literally, but is used to mean scorn. To scorn God is to deny that his powers are effective. In the second book of Kings, Rabshakeh scorns God by sneering at Israel for putting his faith in him. This is declared blasphemy in the next book by Hezekiah. Nowhere, in any context, did Rabshateh claim that another entity should be given credit for any supposed work of God. The blasphemy was simply denying that God deserved Israel's devotion.
In Ezekiel 20, God is explaining how the Israelites have blasphemed against him. He includes their worshiping the idols of their fathers instead of him, profaning his Sabbaths, rejecting his statutes, not observing his ordinates, and passing firstborn children through fire. Not a single mention of their attributing his acts to someone else.
Romans 2 explains how blasphemy through hypocrisy can be perpetrated by Christians.
It is also of the utmost hubris to claim that ' true Christians ' cannot blaspheme God. We know with absolute certainty that being a Christian does not grant anyone supernatural powers of theological comprehension. If anything, we are shown that they adopt blinders that keep them from reading anything in the Bible that contradicts their narrow, selfish views. I would also point out that anyone so prideful as to pretend that Christian's are incapable of sinning against God are saying in essence that Jesus died did not die for their sins, making them guilty of blasphemy against both Jesus and God. I wonder what sort of reception they expect to get in heaven?
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.
Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.
I'm speaking from the Calvinistic point of view which, by definition, a true Christian cannot committ blaspehmy of the Holy Spirit. Tell me, who doesn't know about theology here?
"Professing to be wise, they became fools," - Romans 1:22
Oh, I didn't know that I was dealing with a predestination Calvinist. Primitive Baptist by any chance?
Gosh, where to start on the flaws of that doctrine... I suppose the first argument would be how morality goes out the window alongside personal responsibility. Ahhh, but that does make you a hypocrite as well by saying you don't believe in atheists. According to Calvin's joke of a doctrine, we atheists are preordained to be atheists and it is pointless, in fact, contrary to the direct will of God, to attempt to change their preordained fate. Your very attempt at arguing with us demonstrates your own lack of belief in this doctrine, and places you firmly in the field of hypocrites.
See you in hell, oh hypocrite.
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.
Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.
Do you realize that this entire belief system carries the No True Scotsman fallacy? Unless you can conclusively prove this belief, it is, by definition, bullshit.
This question contains another fallacy, albeit implicitly, because you are beginning with the assumption that your interpretation of Christianity is true. By your logic, anyone that believes a "true" Christian can commit blasphemy of the Holy Ghost doesn't know about theology. Yes?
Clearly, from his posts, Desdenova has shown that he understands Calvinism. You seem to be equating his failure to telepathically determine your level of delusion with his knowledge of the subject. Correct?
I don't exist.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Wrong. The Calvinist belief is not a "sin for free" excuse. If a "Christian" is living his life and willingly and knowingly walking the path of sin, he not truly a Christian. That's what it boils down to.
Now, can you prove that morality goes out the window? Also, how do you know that you are truly predestined to be an atheist? Just because you are now does not mean that you always will be.
1 John 2:19 - " 19(A)They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, (B)so that it would be shown that they all are not of us" Cross reference (A) to Acts 20:30 and (B) to 1 Cor 11:19.
Need anymore proof that it's "BS"?
And no, he does not understand Calvinism because he believes that true Christians can lose their salvation and committ the unforgiveable sin.
"Professing to be wise, they became fools," - Romans 1:22
Here are the tenants of Calvinism that I am making reference to. Any REAL CALVINIST would already know these, and would have no need to inquire about them. *snicker*
1. God has a magical VIP list that he composed before creation that includes the names of everyone going to heaven.
2. Jesus died only for those on the VIP list.
3. Only those on the list get the God Vibe of irresistable grace.
4. Once on the list, you can't be taken off.
With this we have predestination. This means that god, through some arbitrary means, decided that a group of people will go to heaven. t doesn't matter what they do in life, they are on the VIP list, so the go to heaven. Mass murderers, pedophiles, you name it, if they are on the VIP list, they are in. It is all preordained. Doesn't matter if you are good or evil, and you have no need to account for your actions. It is all in the VIP book, has been for eternity, and if you are in you're in. No repentance, no reparations, no free will. You are a puppet with a programed dance that nobody can change. Poof, no morality needed!
OK, hope that wraps this problem up. Now, since it seems to have escaped your attention, what are your thoughts on those passages I mentioned from Ezekiel and Romans? How do you justify Calvinism in light of the Bible contradicting it? Why do you choose to ignore the hebrew word for blasphemy while making your claims about blasphemy? Are you saying that the Bible is wrong and Calvin is right?
I'm starting to think that some theologically ignorant little fundie isn't gonna be making the VIP list. Tee hee!
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.
Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.
Oh, alright, then I concede this point. It still contains a logical fallacy, but you've proven that this belief is in the Bible.
edit: I haven't really studied this detail so I'm not sure what the Bible says about predestination. But I wouldn't be surprised if the Bible contradicted itself on this matter.
Hahaha, when he originally made that statement, he didn't know you were a Calvinist. His error is not incorrectly interpreting the Bible; it's incorrectly reading your mind. In a debate, we usually don't discuss beliefs based on what the Bible actually stipulates, only what the average Christian believes because none of them follow the Bible anyways. They all proclaim something different. After all, if Christians actually followed the Bible, they'd be stoning people left and right.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Theology is all wrong trick fuck, fear of the unknown and control based thinking, a defiition of Satan, Lucifer, the Devil, Demons.
Atheism Books.
The big problem with the redefinition of Blasphemy is why would Jesus make the effort to say it if it was something that was all but impossible to do?
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
The argument here fails because there is no way to know for sure Jesus was not an agent of Satan. In Luke 11:14-26 Jesus heals a dumb man. Some people in the crowd suggest he is doing his healing by way of Satan's power. Jesus argues that this cannot be as Satan would be working against himself and a house divided against itself can't stand. The problem being is that Satan could have a master plan and was acting in a manner that seemed to be of God but was in fact working to deceive, he is after all said to be the master deceiver by believers. There is no way you can know if Jesus was a higher authority than the devils being cast out or was Satan himself. So casting out devils in a few could lead many down the path to damnation by creating belief in a false messiah.
This of course depends on which multiple choice version of the supposed baptism you accept or lack thereof as shown in John where Jesus is not shown to be baptized.
As you have left the Catholic Church or Calvin did and you accept Calvinist interpretation it is you that has gone out from the "True Christians" of the Church as Benedict 16 has made clear. So you are a false Christian and hence blaspheming god in the view of the catholic Church. As blaspheming an imaginary entity has no punishment you need not worry, all will be fine when you become worm food.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
The devil can do nothing by himself. No plan that he has can debunk a plan that God has. It simply won't happen.
So because John didn't write about Jesus' baptism it didn't happen?
Can you give me Biblical support for the Catholic beliefs?
Do you have Biblical support of any of these assertions?
The word as we use it today is not the same as when it was written. Also, it was as a warning to non-believers and to people who deceieve themselves into thinking they are true Christians when they don't live their life as such. Also, if you read my explanation of why Jesus said it, it hits at the heart of the redemptive work of Jesus, and mocking that is reason enough to call it unforgiveable.
First off, your view of Calvinism is called "Hyper Calvinism" and was rejected by the Church. Calvinism doens't teach a "sin-for-free" type of thing, that's what Hyper Calvinism is. Calvinism teaches that those who willfully and knowingly walk in sin and profess to be Christians are not truly saved.
Second, I want to know what standard you use to boldly say that murderers and pedophiles are wrong for what they do. I'm interested to see if it's your subjective opinion or do you have a standard.
Third, you didn't answer my question. How do you know that you are not predestined? Do you know all things?
Those passages are used in different context than what Jesus was talking about. To be honest, I haven't done enough research on those two passages, but I do know that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is said to be unforgivable because it penetrates, or scorns (like you said the original Hebrew means) the redemptive work of Jesus on the Cross.
"Professing to be wise, they became fools," - Romans 1:22
Unless of course God has a plan which you don't understand as he alone knows why he has made such a tricky game. Perhaps Satan is just testing mankind in general on the orders of God as he did with Job. How would you know for sure? Then again it could by on the orders of Zeus as conceived and propagated by Nemesis or even Ares.
As John was one of the 2 alleged disciples of Jesus that supposedly wrote accounts his failure to include that which you consider of prime importance clearly suggests there are disparate views even in the time of frenzied writing of the 1st century. As the 3 other accounts have extreme differences in the events of such alleged baptism and immediately thereafter such as where Jesus went and who and how disciples were recruited why would any of it belong in the real world and not just in a mythical tale?
The wise and conniving Catholic Church has determined that the lowly masses are not those that should interpret God's word but they the con men should do so to tell all the suckers and I mean the believers what be the truth. If you are not aware of the beliefs of the Catholic Church you have rejected why should I a non-existent atheist (at least you have so claimed) provide you knowledge in that which you have clear lack of education?
Absolutely! See Here!
*Edit* As to worm food, when I was a grave digger many years ago all the bodies we excavated appeared to have been lunched upon by worms and bacteria. I suggest you go personally verify this for yourself by digging up a grave or two.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
Your right, it could be the devil. But how you explain Jesus victory over the devil when he grabbed the keys of sin and death out of his hands?
I would love for you to point out these "extreme differences" in the accounts of Jesus' baptism. Can your prove that they were that extreme? Or are you just making assertions and assumptions to defend your point?
Again, can you prove to me that the Catholic Churches doctrines are correct? Telling me the history of the catholic church does nothing for your argument whatsoever.
Also, are you really taking my sig seriously? Great! I was hoping it would get someones attention.
So basically, you can't. If all you can do is point me to a site, you can't show me that the Catholic church is correct. Thanks for playing.
I'm asking you to prove your assertions that you stated.
"Professing to be wise, they became fools," - Romans 1:22
Prove that there really was a Superman, or there is the story? You voodoo idol worshipers would be all childishly funny if you weren't sick and dangerous.
Atheism Books.
Something -someone- has provoked you recently, I AM GOD AS YOU. Right?
1. If that were true, people would neither sin nor die. But they do. Who has the keys again? Did Jesus give them back or is he just getting his jollies with them?
2. Read here for the discrepancies http://www.abu.nb.ca/courses/NTIntro/LifeJ/BaptismJesus.htm#T12
3. I think his point is that neither Catholic doctrine nor Calvinist doctrine are correct. I always find it amusing that people can draw from the same Bible and get such a variance between doctrines. It's amazing what human imagination can do - it can create so many religions from one imaginative book.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
I like how the theist uses a logical line of inquiry to argue against Catholicism. As in, repeating the same assertions about Catholicism doesn't make them true, we have to actually submit evidence. If only he was so honest about his own beliefs.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Why is Christianity embargoed from using metaphor? It's figurative language. He stole the keys of sin and death because through his redemptive work on the cross, we shall have eternal life where there is no sin nor death.
"Professing to be wise, they became fools," - Romans 1:22
It appears people still die. As to sin that requires a god to sin against. You need to provide actual physical testable proof for the assertion a god exists before you can claim that there is such a thing as sin.
Again, it is not the responsibility of the non-believer to educate the believer in the details of the holy book held in such high esteem by the believer. Since you asked so nicely and you have an apparent lack of biblical study I will give you a few points. Don't expect this to become standard practice as in the future I will expect you to know your own holy book.
Mark - Mark 1:9-13 has the story. During the event Jesus saw the heavens open and a spirit like a dove descend hearing a voice that said "Thou art my beloved son in whom I am well pleased." He then was instantly transported to the wilderness as in Star Trek. Satan tempted Jesus for 40 days with Mark providing no detail as to the temptations. He hung out with the wild beasts and the angels administered to him. This is at best a third hand story. Jesus told Peter and Peter told Mark or it was from legends circulating making it 4th or 5th hand or even worse.
Luke - Luke 3:21-22 and 4:1-13 has his version. In this case a real dove descends that is the Holy Ghost. Instead of the Star Trek transporter Jesus walks to the wilderness. Luke details some of the temptations including that he should turn stone into bread if he was hungry. If Satan offered to pick up a pizza or have one delivered perhaps that would be considered note worthy. Satan offers Jesus all the land he can see if he falls down and worships him. If the 3 in 1 concept is true Satan was pushing his luck as Jesus/God could have just unmade him from reality such as in Timecop, a really bad Jean Claude Van Damme movie. After the poor attempts at bribery Satan splits for awhile.
Matthew - Is basically similar to Luke except the spirit of god is said to have lighted upon Jesus. Jesus was then led up of the spirit into the wilderness. I don't know if this means he took a hallucinogen or just had his internal spirit removed or what. I vote for mushrooms however. The temptations were basically the same but ordered differently. Satan leaves and there is no mention that it was for a while as in Luke.
John - John 1:26-34 details the non-baptism of Jesus. John mentions Jesus walking by the area where John the Baptist was rinsing people in the Jordan river. John points out that Jesus is the one that is the Lamb of God that came to take away the sin of the world. He says that he had saw (past tense meaning not right then) the Spirit descend on him (Jesus) and he is the one that baptizes with the holy spirit. He says he is the son of god.
Either Jesus is teleported or he walks? Which?
Mark supposedly the oldest version has no details while Luke and Matt do. This looks like legend building as the story gets retold more detail is added to suck in new listeners and refine the story.
If John is correct Jesus starts recruiting the day after John the Baptist first sees him. This means there are no 40 days. Please explain how this is not significantly different.
Jesus recruits his minions.
I'm only going to discuss the first four you can figure the rest out on your own.
Mark - The first four recruits are Simon. Andrew, James and his brother John. They just walk away from their lives leaving their dad out fishing. Mark 1:16-20.
Matthew - Same as Mark. Matthew 3:12-17.
Luke - He has the great fish catch episode as part of the recruitment. Luke 5:1-11 details how Jesus caused a multitude of fish to be caught, a similar story as in John 21 after he has been executed and resurrected. All 4 of the previously named disciples were recruited at once in this version.
John - As he had no baptism event the following day after John called Jesus the son of god in John 1:35-51 2 of John's disciples heard John call Jesus the lamb of god and they followed him. Jesus asked them what they seek and they answered where do you dwell. Jesus said come and see. One of these two was Andrew. The name of the other is not given. He went to get his brother Simon Peter and he joined up. The next day Jesus went forth into Galilee and found Philip. Philip then went to get Nathanael who brought him to Jesus.
So exactly how do you not see John and Luke being significantly different from each other and also from Mark and Matthew in the calling of the disciples and not consider it to be extremely different?
As I am an ex-Catholic heretic atheist I have rejected their doctrines as fictional along with the fantasy that you also propagate.
You are entitled to not believe that an atheist is talking to you if you so chose. I don't believe in God but I do know that there are people such as you that do. You can deny reality and say that atheists do not exist if you like.
Again it is not my job to show you how your beliefs are considered heretical by the catholic Church. I have never said the Catholic Church is correct only that they claim that those who are not of their fold are heretics. They are full of just as much fantasy as all other Christians including your Calvinist beliefs in my opinion as a parochial school educated person (in Lutheran Schools not Catholic as well as in a Jesuit grad school) It is something you have in common with non-believers, you are not part of the True Church according to their current leader Benedict 16 and hence a heretic.
See MSN article.
See CNN Article.
Catholic Doctrine.
Catholic Doctrinal Concordance.
Newadvent Catholic Website. If you want specifics go here.
The Vatican web site I previously listed has all of his proclamations as well as the other popes. Search it yourself.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
Calviinism for the Theologically Ignorant 101:
Calvinistic philosophy has 5 points, sometimes called TULIP as an acronym.
Point 1. Total Depravity: Left to our own devices, we are too selfish to give 100% to the invisible sky daddy.
Point 2. Unconditional election: Certain people are on the VIP list to attend the invisible sky daddies party. He created this list arbitrarily, probably picking names at random from the heavenly phone directory. If your name isn't on the list, you don't get to attend the party.
Point 3. Limited atonement: J.C. became a dead Jew on a stick not to atone for the sins of everyone, but only for the sins of those on the VIP list. The rest of you poor bastards are screwed.
Point 4. Irresistible grace: This is the warm fuzzy feeling of having the spirit of god all up in ya. Those on the VIP list get this. It is easy to identify by the smug, self righteous, and and sneeringly contemptuous attitude of those possessed by it.
Point 5. Perseverance of the saints: This is Calvin's childish backup plan for when his ridiculous theology invariably falls apart due to lack of sustainability. Since, according to the incredibly vain, religiously myopic, holier than thou piece of goat dung Calvin, if someone sees through his juvenile theology, realizing it for the steaming pile of defecation it is, that person obviously never really had the spirit of god all up in 'em. Wonderfully self serving circular reasoning, ain't it?
That is Calvinism in a nut shell. Pseudo-Calvinists can label it whatever they wish, but all the renaming in the world cannot change the fact that this, with all the implications of no free will and accountability, is what Calvin taught.
Evolution gives me these views, as they protect what is beneficial to the survival of the species, and punish what is harmful to the species. Were I religious, I would likely hypocritically and amorally apply these standards to only my own tribe, group, or affiliation. bashing the babies of enemies on stone from psalm 137 would be just one of many examples of selective morality in the Bible. Fortunately, I have a superior morality devoid of the vile and primitive Biblical god.
I didn't answer because I consider the question irrelevant. I don't know, or even think that I am not predestined. I don't believe in your book of shepherd fairy tales, god, heaven, or hell.
Well, you can't expect Jesus to get things right. After all, he was even more theologically ignorant than the average fundy. The guy didn't even know that Satan was an agent of Yahweh, sort of his prosecuting attorney. Jesus, like others before him, had bought into the adoption of Zoroastrian duality, thinking that Satan was Yahweh's nemesis. Understandable for a mortal, but not forgivable from the son of god. Heck, the guy couldn't even quote scripture correctly. Just compare his rendition of psalm 78:2 to what he said in Matt 13:35. A very mortal error. He also confuses Jeremiah with Zechariah and actually misquotes the misidentified Zechariah in the process. Based on things like this, it seems safe to say that Jesus didn't have a clue what he was talking about. I mean, the guy was obviously nuts, what with his cursing out of season fruit trees and all. Probably end stage syphilis.
But all that aside, we atheists blaspheme ( scorn ) all three parts; dead Jew on a stick, invisible sky daddy, and the spook, so I fail to see what your problem is. But hell, if you want me to spell it out, here goes. All those things in the Bible, ya know, like creating the heavens and the earth, resurrecting people, loaves to fish.... all that crap? I did all that. Yep, thats right, not the spook, but me. Thats how I roll, when I'm not rolling 20 siders, that is.
Good enough blasphemy for ya? Have a nice day.
It takes a village to raise an idiot.
Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.
Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.
Who decides what parts of the Bible are metaphor and what is to be taken literally?
Or do you make that decision whenever it suits your purpose?
<Christian looks at bible passage>
"Oh...that really doesn't make sense, does it? How can I sell it to the gullible who attend my church? Got it! I'll say it was a metaphor! It used figurative language! That'll keep the offerings coming in!"
<end Christian scam>
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin