Greatest I am

Are we living in God’s kingdom, or Satan‘s? What did Jesus mean when He said “The Kingdom of God is at hand? Mat 4;17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Jesus seems to be saying that God’s kingdom was right there at that point in time and that would also mean that it is still here and now. If God began by being master and owner of all that is, and he spans or owns the whole of creation, and scripture is right that says he does not change, then logic says that we are now in is God’s kingdom and we never left it. Ps 139 8 If I ascend into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. Romans 12:21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. These also seem to confirm that God is everywhere, even in hell, where he is working at saving lost souls and that would make the following quote also true. 2 Peter 3;9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Obviously, nothing and no one can thwart God’s will. He always gets what he wills even if at times we cannot understand how he does it. All souls are therefore saved and none perish. Now I know some will say that there cannot be anything evil in God’s kingdom. Consider that Satan was in heaven before God made him the prince of this world. Therefore, there can definitely be evil in God’s kingdom. In fact, the myths of Eden and Job both show God consorting with Satan. In Eden, he allows Satan access to A & E and in Job, to Job. If hell and earth are no longer in God’s kingdom, then that would mean that God lost some of his original holdings/kingdom, and I cannot see any good reason for him to change from full ownership of what was, to partial ownership of what is. Are we living in God’s kingdom, or Satan‘s? Regards DL

Citation please. Try the literalist and fundamental ones. How would you know? You just said they did not exist. Seriously? Atoms are similar to theology. Yes. Because it is worthless. Yes. When they are trying to undersyand how snakes and donkeys can talk. I will not stop either. It is my duty to correct stupidity. I know but if a theist wants to bring it up as a part of his theology, why would I not discuss it and refute it? You want to! And I think that believing in miracles is exactly like believing in magic. I ask again, what is the difference? Regards DL Skilled, un-skilled, learned or not. Sure, if you miss match the contestants in our little test to show the varying aspects that you show, of course we will find them that the odd time the one not reading his native language will win.. If the two contestants are fairly well matched in term of education and comprehension skills. The one reading in his native language IMO will win every time. This should show we have a draw as neither of us have any test scores to show. Let's move on shall we. If not, I threaten to start writing in French. LOL Regards DL

Apples and oranges. Yes, someone with training in a certain discipline will likely read something in a foreign language, that he has some knowledge of, may read more into the document than a novice reading in his own language. Both could be wrong but the one reading in his own languages, because he knows nuance and possibly a deeper understanding of usage, will still likely get closer to the meaning the writer was trying to convey than someone reading a foreign tongue that he might not know, in terms of nuance and use. Without testing, we may never come to a conclusion and all tests would be different. This following speaks to some of the issues here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mpHpLrJVHY&feature=player_embedded#at=437 Regards DL No. The Godhead I know is a part of nature and at no time exceeds the bound of nature and physics. I have no proof to show and no dogma to sell. I show my own anecdotal experience and do not argue for belief. I do not but am obviously addressing the O P to Christians. So I have been told. I have yet to meet one. Not to a certain age. Imagination is quite healthy for children. Those you mention do not offer to burn you forever in hell if you do not believe in them. fear makes the morality quite different. No. As no teacher will demand that it be believed as correct and exact. Aples and oranges. We have his plays to ponder. We have no miracles to ponder. If someone is trying to give me what they say are true facts about an unfathomable, unknowable entity who works in mysterious ways, then yep, I feel free to ridicule their delusion. I do not limit theological thought and find nothing wrong in considerations of a God of the gaps. So God’s miracle is not God’s magic. What difference do you see between miracles and magic? Regards DL

Of course not. Knowing a language still says that you will likely understand what the author is saying. I am French. I have seen Nostradamus interpreted by the English yet I look at the same text and wonder where in hell they got their interpretations from. Many of the interpretations they make does not even come close. All you would need to do is look at the various definitions of I am. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_that_I_Am Regards DL

Certainly. People with interpret from their own cultural base and understanding. Especially when old languages are at issue. Seems to me though that for interpretation of Jewish text, Jews would be the best interpreters. Thanks to nuance in language, I would think that a German interpreting Mein Kamph would be a more accurate interpretation than someone who was born to some other language. How do you figure that man’s elevation and good sense to elevate himself would still lead to original sin when scripture says this-------- Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Regards DL I hope that was a general "you" and did not include me. I do not believe in the usual Bible God. Regards DL

In the years I have been about in places like this, I have yet to speak to a Jew who literally believes that Eden was the fall of man. They tend to agree as, I do, that man gaining a moral sense and becoming like God’s, was an elevation for mankind and not a fall. Fact is that they, in the past as now, think it strange that Christians read their book literally when they, the originators of the O T do not. Pwagen Yes. My primary focus is the Abrahamic God. You are right in saying that reality must be ignored, to some extent, if you are to be a Christian. No virgin birth would kill Jesus’ sacrifice and all of Christianity hinges on it. Many Christians try to deny that they are literalists but they must be if they call themselves Christian. IMO. If the Greeks believed in a supernatural guarantor of the validity of justice, they would have thought of that entity as supernatural. That is a miracle. I think that by the time Socrates and the boys came along, they knew that all the old legends had been born I Sumer and Egypt. We may never know. I cannot see the Greek, or any people actually, giving of their hard earned wealth as sacrifices to their Gods without thinking that they would get some kind of miraculous return on their investment.

Why do you have to believe in fantasy to believe in God? Before you jump all over me, remember that I am not an atheist. I believe in a Godhead that is of this world and the reality we see around us. Mine is not the God you believe in because to believe in that one, one must buy into fantasy, miracles and magic. This I have no need or desire to do. The O T, the base of the Bible, is a document that the original writers, the Jews, do not believe in a literal way. http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/doubtingexodus.htm Further, believers tend to believe what is written about God even as whoever is doing the writing admit that God is unfathomable and unknowable and works in mysterious ways. A catch 22. As an adult, do you not think it strange and immoral that you would preach to and teach your children that there are real talking snakes and donkeys, that people can walk on water, turn staffs into snakes and that a loving God would use genocide against humans? This being after nearly all of his perfect works have somehow become imperfect and thus showing a creator God who just cannot create creatures that will do as programmed. These things that are impossible to believe unless you have bought into fantasy, miracles and magical thinking. As far as the non believing world is concerned, there is no such thing as miracles and magic. No believer has ever been able to show or prove that any miracle has ever been performed and it would seem to me that if God wanted us to believe in them, he would have left one here for us to ponder. He did not. If your God did not do all of the miracles shown in scripture, is there anything left that shows a real God? God would always want what is best for him as well as what is best for man. Note that 6 million of us starve to death yearly. A yearly holocaust. If God does have all of these miracle making powers, how can things not be exactly the way he wants for both himself and man? Now I know that many will point to free will, but because the Bible shows God ignoring man’s free will to live when he kills us all over the O T, this negates that argument so I hope no one bothers trying to use it. If you believe in reality instead of fantasy and magic, does your God disappear? Does God have to be able to do miracles to be your God? Regards DL

Individual words and their meaning we may never know. Scripture also says that God cursed the earth. Do you see a cursed earth or a wonderful planet that man has thrived on? The point is, as far as scripture says, Satan is our prince and would have to be if the temptation of Jesus is to have any legitimacy. Further, does it make sense to you that God would sentence Satan to hell and then defer the sentence for 2000 years so that Satan can run about corrupting those that God loves. Including his first brand new proto humans? If yes. Really? That makes sense? Regards DL ================================================================= =============================================================== 'lemur' timestamp='1304447615' post='605060'] There's usually some reason people sin. Even when it's not fun or otherwise pleasurable, you could look at it in terms of Freud's death drive. Are you sure about that? Maybe you're just not aware of the damage you caused. Can you give an example of harmless sin? According to Christianity, everyone is a sinner and the issue is getting them to recognize it and confess their sins before God. Now you have gone and confused me. You say this above which is true, which is basically an arbitrary standard, and then say it is not below. Perhaps it is my poor language skills. Repentance isn't some arbitrary standard set by an arbitrary God. It just so happens that people can't find inner-peace without owning up to them and expressing regret. In Freudian terms, it's like a repressed anxiety that has to come out of repression to be dealt with. The standard is set by God, as far as that fictional Bible is conserned. Perhaps it is just the word "arbitrary" that is throwing me off. Regards DL

If it is the Christ/Jesus of the Trinity you are speaking of then, no. Further, if you check this article, the part on non-Trinitarians, it will show that not all believe the same way about Jesus. Further, you indicated above that the three or four heads were not equal but this articles also says that that is false. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity#Nontrinitarians Regards DL

This might work except if you think of your sins. They aware likely fun. Most of mine were rather enjoyable and fun or I would not have done them. No self destruction involved. I do know that not all sins are victimless and when there is a true victim, the fun or self gratification may not work quite the same way as other more victimless sins. Every sinner is different and some are quite nasty. God seems to think that repentance is crucial and if it is, then we must all sin as we must all repent. Regards DL

Three heads all un-equal. Four if you count the human Jesus. You are making stuff up as you go. Regards DL Foolishness must be quoted in order to discredit it. Christians here should take the advise of this Jew and ask Jews how to interpret the book that they plagiarized. Regards DL ============================== Reprint from the O P "Scripture seems to contradict this definition. It shows a N T Jesus that must learn and an O T God who changes thanks to repenting." Not to be crude but---------what other fucking holy book other than the Bible has a N T and O T? Regards DL

Stupider ansd stupider. There is nowhere in scripture that I know of where hell is not infinite. As I showed above, I do not believe any angels fell. God does not give to Satan the whole of manking to rule if he sees him as fallen. You have God sentencing Satan to hell and then deferring the sentence so that he can corrupt souls. How droll. Regards DL You should not ask logical question of any theists. You will not get a logical answer back. Regards DL

Thanks for this. I see that some Catholics have moved away from their, few who take the narrow road, to a few on the wide road. A complete flip from when this ex R C was a church goer. I still maintain though that if God loses even one soul then he can be said to be a loser of a God. To even have one soul thwart his will kills his omnipotence. Regards DL

The old carrot and stick mentality. At some point in growing up, if people will not do good without being motivated either by fear of hell or the benefits of a reward, then they have missed the boat of being good humans. You will note that in many countries where atheists have higher numbers than here, there is less crime. Strange how they can be better than we Christian countries. Regards DL What? When did Catholics start thinking that way? A reference or two would be nice. Regards DL C P I fetched this for you. Regards DL

Grace relies on good information. Many Christians say that God does not send us to hell and that we CHOOSE to go there on our own. If fully informed, only the insane would reject God. Given that God wills the very best for us, and given that we ourselves want the very best for ourselves, then it would seem that no one could make a FULLY INFORMED decision against God. And if not FULLY INFORMED, then the free will defense of hell falls down. For me, this would apply to the above, given that to reject that which is (by the definition of Christians) the very best for us would imply that one is not fully informed. This argument is developed in many ways in Thomas Talbott's book "The Inescapable Love of God", where he shows how a doctrine of Universalism (all are eventually saved) is compatible with the Biblical teaching as found in the NT, especially the writings of St Paul. This quote also indicates that it is God’s will that none be lost and I cannot see God letting his will be thwarted by mankind. Peter 3;9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. That being the case, there is no hell. Right? No one who is not insane would choose hell. Right? God does not allow his will to be thwarted. Right? Regards DL

I get that B S line a lot. It is always wrong. If all three heads of the trinity are not equal then how can it be one God? can one head keep a secret from the other heads? No one knows the time of the end but the father. As to Jesus being in submission to the father, only through me, Jesus' words, say that he is above the father. Regards DL Athena Scripture is not clear on who Jesus disobeyed. Perhaps it was for for his temper tantrum at the temple. There are some ancient books that did not make it into the Bible that speaks of baby and chid Jesus being a real little prick but I did not plan on quoting these here. For the purpose of this O P all I have is that quote and if we assume that Jesus dies a good man, then his---no one is good but the father says that between the two episodes, Jesus learned to be good. After all, he was the only perfect sacrifice according to dogma. As to the Candid thing, we were discussing your perfection and I thought you had a good enough mind to be able to confirm or deny the notion that things are as perfect as they could possibly be at any given point in time. Or as they say it, this is the best of all possible worlds. Regards DL

Athena Did I misunderstand your view? Perhaps if you would opine on the Candide position, as to truth or cynicism, I would have a better idea. Regards DL Hebrews 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; If Jesus had to learn obedience, that would mean he disobeyed. Is disobedience then perfect? Regards DL

Athena What you and I are, I call evolving perfection. The U S use of perfection says that it can go to a more perfect state. See the U S constitution. Most people do not comprehend what we seem to agree on. I sometimes try to get them to opine on this being truth or cynicism but few reply. It may be too complex for some to dither out. That or you and I are wrong but I tend to never be wrong. LOL. Candide "It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPClzIsYxvA Regards DL

I agree. People versus sheeple. Sheeple us a scapegoat for their responsibilities, while people step up to their own responsibilities. Regards DL So do I but just not the same God you follow. If you follow your God and he is changing and we are supposed to emulate his according to scripture, how do you know what aspects of yourself you need to change and how do you know what to change to? He has not really given us any direct advise for some time now. Jesus was human as well. He had to learn. Otherwise, his sacrifice would have meant nothing. I prefer volcanoes and virgins. So does God. Much more tender. Do you think it moral to try to profit from the murder of an innocent man? Regards DL That would make Jesus just as much of a genocidal maniac as his father and we just do not perceive him that way. Is that what you are saying? Regards DL

I stand by my better moral position. If you think it is more moral for a God to torture someone without purpose forever, instead of just curing them the way he can, it shows your own foolishness as no self respecting God tortures without purpose. Sick. Regards DL

Can, and does God change? Many seem to think that when scripture says that God is immortal and perfect, it means that God never changes his mind on anything and that his perfection is complete. They use the following basic definition. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perfect Scripture seems to contradict this definition. It shows a N T Jesus that must learn and an O T God who changes thanks to repenting. In the real world, all things seem to evolve. Is God a never changing stagnant pool of information or does he evolve the same as all other life? If he was perfect and complete for millennia in the beginning, why would he suddenly feel a new urge to create and self glorify himself with the love of insignificant creations? Where did his needs for adoration, belief, and obedience from, what to him, would be less than what an amoeba is to us? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdpcGPPoawo&feature=related Further, if his intent was to create many followers, why does scripture show more failed creations than successful ones? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3LNL6wKhXA Regards DL

I was aware of where your head was at. At the wrong place. That is why I gave the above. I was hoping you would think about things but I see that you did not. Any infinite punishment for an finite sin is immoral. For God to look in hell in the far future and see even Hitler and Stalin there, and have to recognize that out of a life of many years in hell, that they only sinned for .00000000000000000000000000000000001 % of their lives and were tortured for the rest, shows a completely immoral God. If you agree with that hell creating God then that shows your poor morals and not our true God’s. Regards DL I don’t think I can. The above I got from talking with Jews. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lillith Jews are where I was told of the adam/society and Adam, the man. Since it fit my view of Eden being just a coming of age myth, I did not dig further. Perhaps you can check with any Jew that you might know. I do not know any here as yet. That page is silly. Claims like "perhaps the most likely time for the battle to have happened, lies somewhere between the Old and New Testament" are trivially false, because the Old Testament was only canonized after the writing of parts of the New Testament. (Also, the quoted sentence has a rather nasty comma splice.) The tradition seems to be the one from the Book of Enoch, but that was never canonized or granted status in the Church (besides being quoted a bit). You are bound to get silly claims all over the Bible. Myths are like that sometimes. Listen to this Jew talk of it. Regards DL

I have no idea what you are looking for. So we are told. We are also told that Jesus was God and I must assume that God can tell lies from truth. Tradition. http://www.steliart.com/angelology_fallen_heavens_war.html Regards DL Not to mention that to believe it literally, one would have to believe in talking snakes and a God who would allow access to his new humans to a supernatural entity who has the power to deceive the whole world. That is just too ridiculous a notion. You would also have to believe that God would punish A & E for becomng like him which is what the Bible tells us to do. Again ridiculous. Yet many theists believe such B S thanks to their dogma. Jews and their various sects hold a variety of beliefs. Generally, most do not read scriptures literally. They are not as retarded as other Abrahamic cults. http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/doubtingexodus.htm So says dogma but God's dismal success rate says otherwise. Think of Noah's day. HOW does an omnipotent being suddenly regret anything and everything he had ever done? Is he not supposed to be perfect and all knowing? Regards DL Three things. First. Do not insult me by calling me a Christian. Second. Better to shovel coal in hell than to spend eternity watching friends, neighbors and our children in torture and flame forever. Only a sick mind would conceive of such a situation or wish it upon anyone. That is why God would not do such because then, heaven would be hell. If those in heaven did not go insane then they could not have once been human or good. You should think of hell just a bit and recognize that God would not create such an immoral construct. Lose your barbaric tribal mentality. We are in 2010, not 110. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9FKn4rKXEY&feature=related Lastly. Judgment and punishment go hand in hand. Our human laws have a form of punishment where the penalty is graduated to fit the crime. An eye for an eye type of justice. God‘s punishment seems to surpass this standard. The definition I am comparing here is the eternal fire and torture type of hell and I am not particularly interested in the myriad of other definitions and theories that some use to supplant this traditional view. To ascertain if hell would be a moral construct or not, all you need do is answer these simple question for yourself. 1. Is it good justice for a soul to be able to sin for only 120 years and then have to suffer torture for 12000000000000000000000000 + years? 2. Is it good justice for small or mediocre sinners to have to bear the same sentence as Hitler, Stalin and other genocidal maniacs? This might actually include God if you see Noah’s flood as God using genocide and not justice against man. Pardon the digression. Punishment is usually only given to change attitude or actions and cause the sinner to repent. 3. Is it good justice to continue to torture a soul in hell if no change in attitude or actions are to result? 4. If you answered yes to these questions, then would killing the soul not be a better form of justice than to torture it for no possible good result or purpose? Is hell a moral construct or not? Please explain your reasons and know that ---just because God created it ---does not explain your moral judgment. It is your view I seek and not God’s as no one can speak for God. Regards DL It should not but it seems it does. I think it is because of man distorting the original myth but let‘s look at it as generally believed by theists. A & E did use their free will to reason about what was good and evil and decided to follow what the Bible later tells us to do. Know good and evil and become like God. The Jews and Hebrew saw this as mans elevation but Christians turned it around and called it a fall. Guilt building for $$$. All people seem to think that developing a moral sense is a good idea yet God punished the hell out of all of us for doing this right thing. Go figure. Yes. Our free wil seems to opposed God's notion of free will. His free will gift, to my way of thinking, is not free will at all but a threat and coercion.He says, do things my way or burn forever in hell. Hardly a free choice now is it? Regards DL

This speaks to adam and Adam. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:26-28 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. God creating Adam leads to incest. If God created adam, then there is no incest. Christians, as usual, ignore the better Jewish way of reading Genesis. The temptation of Jesus by Satan and the notion that God cannot be where evil is. If Satan did not have dominion over the earth, then he could not have tempted Jesus with something that was not his. The Bible writers would have known this. It also explains why God is not here now, evil is here. Revelation speaks of when Satan was cast from heaven. Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. Regards DL No argument on this. Unfortunately, while the majority seem to be believers or at least profess to be, division will remain. Religion are slowly dying but until they are basically dead, this quote tells us why what you posit in your last, is still far away. "Whoever imagines himself a favorite with God, holds other people in contempt. Whenever a man believes that he has the exact truth from God, there is in that man no spirit of compromise. He has not the modesty born of the imperfections of human nature; he has the arrogance of theological certainty and the tyranny born of ignorant assurance. Believing himself to be the slave of God, he imitates his master, and of all tyrants, the worst is a slave in power." --Robert Ingersoll Regards DL

God gave humanity to Satan as a gift and reward. God, in the beginning, created all that was. He called it Eden and put adam in it. The lower case adam, means society. God later called us Adam and Eve, to designate and differentiate man and woman. That is likely why creation of man is shown twice in Genesis. He then gave all of us to Satan as a gift and made him the ruler of this world as a reward. This maintains the illusion that God gave us free will. After all, free will means we are able to rule ourselves so God himself cannot call himself our ruler without negating our free will. We cannot do as we will if we are following his will. This is quite simple to understand. Satan, the great deceiver, God’s favorite and glorious angel, was then given the power and instruction to deceive all of mankind. This is obviously why Satan and or the talking serpent were in Eden. God does not put a fox in the henhouse without good reason. The reason was to insure that Adam and Eve became as Gods. You will know that the loss of the tree of life is never shown as a loss anywhere in scripture. You likely know why. Dogma says that God basically lost all control over mankind at that point and the absence of God, which many call evil and hell, attests to this as an irrefutable fact. Evil is definitely on earth and since God and evil is said to never be in the same place, we know that God is no longer here. We are on our own against Satan and his minions. A full third of the angels that God felt were good enough to be with his best, Satan. Humanity is Satan’s beyond any doubt. He is the master and we are all slaves to sin. God helps maintain this situation by insuring that all are born with original sin and sets our nature to do just that, sin. Scripture is clear on these points. The big question is why? This seems to be the only answer--------- 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. This tells me that we must all sin and repent, to not perish and insure that we are saved. Colossians 1: 15 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. It does not take a rocket scientist to dither out that if God were to lose any of us, that would not please him. A God, who had miracle available, would always make sure that his will is never thwarted. The following type of scenario is then never allowed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3LNL6wKhXA Those with any sort of faith should know this, but somehow, they follow dogma and a theology that says that God does lose some of us and that somehow, even with all those miracles at hand, Satan and man can thwart God’s will and desire to save us all. This is impossible. It seems that this bishop is be correct. If we are all to be deceived as scripture indicates, and the majority of the world has faith, logic says that if you have faith in Jesus, God or Allah, then your faith is a deception from Satan. Many say that Satan’s greatest deception or trick is to fool us into believing that he does not exist. The opposite seems to be true and that it is God who is no longer here on this evil world. Doubt is a good quality. It wards of gullibility. Should you doubt your faith or do you somehow think that your particular faith, whichever it is, is exempt from Satan’s God given power of deception and dominion over you? Are you so arrogant that you will ignore Gods own prophesy, that all will be deceived, by not judging the God offered by your church? Do you dare take that chance and not judge your God, by his actions, to know if you follow a moral God or not? If deceived, how could we possibly know? I think there is only one solution. That is, compared the two major forms of law and morality on the planet. Secularism and religions. I follow secular law because Satan has deceived you people of faith because I see that you love to hate, and demand that there be a place of punishment instead of a place to cure those you and your false God believe to be lost souls. This Gnostic Christian says that God is a good and moral God and he cures souls. He does not torture them. Any that have truly repented of their sins will know this to be a truth and know that God‘s will that none be lost cannot be thwarted. Even in his never ending absence. He will never return because of the fact of our free will. If we are doing His will, we cannot be exercising our free will. God wants free men. Not slaves. Where is our master Satan then? In our sin nature. Where else could spirit entities live? Regards DL