Pretending to be God

[God]

If you read the Bible critically, you will see major flaws and outright contradictions. The same goes for other major religious texts. What is important in this world is helping others live their lives peacefully and allowing them to be their own person. I created you so that you could be yourselves and live your lives to their fullest, not so that you could blindly follow a cult that speaks and acts in my name.

Like a parent I appreciate a thank you every now and then, but to waste the precious life I have given you praising me and telling others to do the same is inane. Smile not for Me, but for yourselves. Come to your own conclusions on how to treat others, collaborate, reach a common goal. This is what life is truly about.

Take this lesson, my children, and carry it in your heart - not on your lips.

[Churchwork]

If you read the Bible critically, you will see major flaws and outright contradictions. The same goes for other major religious texts.
You are not God. Realize you don't need to have a discussion of the inerrancy of the Bible to prove God of the Bible. All you need do is prove the resurrection as 1 Cor. 15 says, Christianity lives or dies based on the resurrection. So if you can find no naturalistic explanation for the resurrection of Jesus that fits the data, realize Jesus is God. Through Geometric Time God can resurrect after spending 9 hours on the cross (see Hugh Ross's book, Beyond the Cosmos).


What is important in this world is helping others live their lives peacefully and allowing them to be their own person. I created you so that you could be yourselves and live your lives to their fullest, not so that you could blindly follow a cult that speaks and acts in my name.

But you didn't create anyone. You are a person who is falsely proclaiming to be God and that is your sin that separates you from God. God doesn't want you to follow the cult of religions, nor the cult of atheism. He wants you to reconcile you back to Himself through Christ whosoever is willing. If you are unwilling, God will send you to Hell because obviously you can't be with the saved nor can you cease to exist. God wants you to live to your fullest and overcometh in Christ which is the way to live authentic life and not remain a sinner bound for perdition. There is accountability for Christians in the 1000 years, so for Christians who want to remain carnal and fleshly, they will not return with Christ to reign during the 1000 years, but they will be disciplined and be made ready for the time after that in the New City and New Earth in eternity future.


Like a parent I appreciate a thank you every now and then, but to waste the precious life I have given you praising me and telling others to do the same is inane. Smile not for Me, but for yourselves. Come to your own conclusions on how to treat others, collaborate, reach a common goal. This is what life is truly about.

God thanks people? That is like a parent thanking his child assuming the child brought himself into the world!? Nonsense! Do you have recollection of bringing yourself into the world? Of course not, for that would be delusional! How can you have fellowship and communion with God if your spirit is dead to God? That is inane. Life is truly about living life by the Holy Spirit Christ-like--the perfect person. In fact, He is the only sinless person who ever lived for He is God.


Take this lesson, my children, and carry it in your heart - not on your lips.
Your sin is not only pretending to be God but also denying God's gift of your lips. Your heart and lips are not mutually exclusive. Your works and your words are important. Let your words reflect your heart, not a heart hostile to God but one who accepts the reconciliation required because we are all born into sin, eternally separated from God if He provides no remedy. Praise the Lord for His atonement on the cross to save out a people He knew before the foundations of the world who would receive His mercy and grace.

You are not God, never have been or ever will be. That delusion of grandeur is simply arrogance of mindless men!

Listen to this audio of the proof of the resurrection of Jesus (http://www.4truth.net/site/c.hiKXLbPNLrF/b.2903679/k.F323/Audio_Interview__Gary_Habermas_The_Resurrection.ht m).

p.s. by the way, God doesn't make typo's :p so he doesn't have to apologize for making a typo.

[JamesRobert]

Churchwork:

I apologize for this post in advance. Though I have read, and am certain that I am well within the rules for posting here, I am sure that you will take my post differently than it is intended. I merely wish here to go through your response to what I felt was a perfectly well-reasoned post above. The post will be organized into sections corresponding to the quotes and responses that you made.

First, as to a discussion on the inerrant nature of the Bible: I think that a discussion of whether or not the Bible is inerrant is essential to any discussion of its contents. As it is currently impossible to prove the resurrection (hence why we call it faith), a discussion of what we can prove about the Bible makes perfect logical sense. If we can establish that the things in the Bible did happen, then the case for those things that we cannot prove becomes much stronger. You seem very knowledgeable about these things, and I would love to have a discussion with you about them.

Second, I totally agree with the original poster here. My view of Christianity is admittedly slightly different than yours (though please do not get angry with me, if you review the rules, I am well within them). I am honestly asking for assistance with this as well. God is all knowing, all seeing, and all loving. He will forgive your sins, and give you everlasting life. If we were made in His image, why would he condemn us to hell for an eternity? The best way I have ever heard eternity described was by a pastor a few years ago. He said (paraphrasing) that if you picture a pile of sand a few miles high with a sparrow sitting on top of it and were to watch that sparrow take a single grain of sand from that pile to the other side of the world and pile it there, then fly back to the original pile for more sand and continue this way until the entire pile was on the other side of the world, then you would know what the first day of eternity feels like. That's a really, really long time (obviously, but as human beings we are incapable of truly understanding what an eternity is, as the concept of infinity beyond our grasp). My question is this: if God loves us all, even the sinners, why would he condemn us to an eternity in hell over actions that occurred in a period of time that is, to God (and us in heaven/hell), a blink of an eye?

All the original poster was saying is that the Bible tells you how to live your life, but that there is no reason to follow it to the letter (more on this if you take me up on having a discussion on the facts and meaning of the inerrant nature of the Bible). God loves us, He wants us to live our lives.

Finally on this point, atheism is not a cult. It cannot be, it is merely the lack of a belief in God and a reliance on what can be known with certainty. I am not an atheist, but I believe that it is damaging to your cause to refer to atheists as cult members. The proportion of atheists in the general population is growing, and if you intend to stop that trend then the first step should be to stop insulting hundreds of millions of potential followers of Christ.

Third, again here I agree with the original poster. I would like to use your own logic here to show you what he or she was trying to say. If we are to treat God like our parent (though obviously in a much broader sense), as you do, then think of how your parents wanted you to live. There were rules, but the rules were to ensure that you grew up to be a good person. They wanted you to have fun, they wanted you to enjoy life, and they did not want you to get bogged down in minutia. That's all the original poster was trying to say. Human beings are imbued with morals, people may circumvent those morals if they see some gain in it for themselves, but no one will ever say that murder is right, or that adultery is okay, no matter what their religious beliefs. That was the second point that I believe the poster was trying to make, and that you may have misinterpreted.

Finally, I have nothing to say about your last response, there's really not much content there. You were a little abusive, though. The person was writing as if he or she were God, never claiming that they were (see the title of the thread).

I look forward to a discussion with you.

[Churchwork]

First, as to a discussion on the inerrant nature of the Bible: I think that a discussion of whether or not the Bible is inerrant is essential to any discussion of its contents. As it is currently impossible to prove the resurrection (hence why we call it faith), a discussion of what we can prove about the Bible makes perfect logical sense. If we can establish that the things in the Bible did happen, then the case for those things that we cannot prove becomes much stronger.
You can prove the resurrection without demanding inerrancy if the data meets historical requirements for historicity. By so doing, you hold no assumptions such as inerrancy like occurs for the Koran. Faith is established by proof. True faith is not faith because it is unfounded or merely self-declared. Who taught you that? Not God. The reason why God wants you not to assume inerrancy first is because that is overassuming. He says, "prove all things." Only by doing so do you then come to realize the Bible is inerrant. But when trying to lead someone to Christ, you do an injustice by claiming inerrancy off the start, which is not humility, and it turns people off. You want to lead people to Christ, not turn them off.


Second, I totally agree with the original poster here. My view of Christianity is admittedly slightly different than yours (though please do not get angry with me, if you review the rules, I am well within them). I am honestly asking for assistance with this as well. God is all knowing, all seeing, and all loving. He will forgive your sins, and give you everlasting life. If we were made in His image, why would he condemn us to hell for an eternity? My question is this: if God loves us all, even the sinners, why would he condemn us to an eternity in hell over actions that occurred in a period of time that is, to God (and us in heaven/hell), a blink of an eye?
The answer is simple, because you have had more than enough grace. I think the mistaken assumption you are making is in assuming that people would change their minds after they die and resurrected. That's not the case at all. There is something about this life in the body of flesh and blood that seals your fate for forever unto eternity by your own volition. The Bible is clear on Hell, Jesus spoke on Hell more than anyone else. Either Jesus was wrong or the reason why so many people must go to Hell is because that is what they want in eternal terms. And God is loving, He would not allow any unsaved person to be with the saved in the New City and New Earth. If you are saved, you will not be getting to know Hitler, Stalin and Mao. You will no longer shed a tear for them because they will be in Hell for eternity and forgotten, but they will never cease to exist in their conscious awareness of eternal separation from God in a place without God. That's why they wanted. So be it. Just like we have to lock up people in jail for life and carry on with our lives, so does God and His people have to for eternity. Why should God's standard be any less than ours?



All the original poster was saying is that the Bible tells you how to live your life, but that there is no reason to follow it to the letter (more on this if you take me up on having a discussion on the facts and meaning of the inerrant nature of the Bible). God loves us, He wants us to live our lives.
Actually you are being vague. It depends on what you mean by letter. If by letter trying to live by the law with your own strength, then no. But if by letter all God's Word is profitable for edification and to know His will, then yes. You will know thyself better by knowing God's Word and live your life as He desires. The original poster wanted to go his own away separate from God.


Finally on this point, atheism is not a cult. It cannot be, it is merely the lack of a belief in God and a reliance on what can be known with certainty. I am not an atheist, but I believe that it is damaging to your cause to refer to atheists as cult members. The proportion of atheists in the general population is growing, and if you intend to stop that trend then the first step should be to stop insulting hundreds of millions of potential followers of Christ.
Agnosticism is lack of belief one way or another. Whereas atheism is believing there is no God no matter the reason. If you don't distinguish these two meanings, it shows a problem in your thinking, for these two words don't exist for no reason at all. Atheism is a cult. It's making a claim God does not exist even though it has no basis for doing so and contrary to the evidence, e.g. 4 Step Proof for God (http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2256) and the Minimal Facts Approach (http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2256) and There Are Only 4 Choices (http://biblocality.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4209&postcount=1). Atheists present no viable challenge to these proofs. These prove you can know God exists with certainty and that Jesus is God. Unless you realize you are sinner in a cult, how can you ever receive the solution to your problem? Unless an atheist can be honest with himself about the distinction between an agnostic and an atheist, he is lying to himself. It is important a person comes to the table genuinely otherwise the discussion is pointless. It is interesting though the reason more atheists these days are claiming they are atheists when they are really meaning agnostic. I just insist they be honest about their position, otherwise it is cultic, and they can't move forward with the data.


Third, again here I agree with the original poster. I would like to use your own logic here to show you what he or she was trying to say. If we are to treat God like our parent (though obviously in a much broader sense), as you do, then think of how your parents wanted you to live. There were rules, but the rules were to ensure that you grew up to be a good person. They wanted you to have fun, they wanted you to enjoy life, and they did not want you to get bogged down in minutia. That's all the original poster was trying to say. Human beings are imbued with morals, people may circumvent those morals if they see some gain in it for themselves, but no one will ever say that murder is right, or that adultery is okay, no matter what their religious beliefs. That was the second point that I believe the poster was trying to make, and that you may have misinterpreted.
The original poster was not saying that at all, for he called himself "God." He has a conscience to know better not to say this. The Bible speaks against the petty self, don't swallow a camel and spit out a gnat. So that is not the issue being raised. The issue the original poster was claiming this is not God's Word and that His Word is not real and that it is not by God's caring hand we all need. If God gives you His 66 books, He does so because He loves you and wants the best for you, so all of it is for your benefit. Don't look for excuses not to read it, for that is your flesh speaking. There is no issue then but for the person who is going to Hell and rejects God's atonement as the original poster does. We all have the law written upon our hearts to know right and wrong, but still people reject the salvation of the cross. So you see the problem? People claiming they are moral, but then they kill and rape and pillage. Hence, the need for God's Word. It is in you getting into the details of God's Word that changes you. The time you sacrifice with God is more abundant grace. It is you remaining without daily reading Scripture that causes you to get lost in the world. Satan is the god of this world. One of the ways he pulls you away from God's Word is by summing up all things with money so you got money on the brain all the time. If you can sacrifice $200,000 of your time to read God's Word then what blessings will be yours. What is the point in gaining the world if you lose your soul? The issues you raise are not that of a Christian. You ought not to have a view of Christianity different than Scripture. Otherwise it is not Christianity.


Finally, I have nothing to say about your last response, there's really not much content there. You were a little abusive, though. The person was writing as if he or she were God, never claiming that they were (see the title of the thread).
The person was not writing as if they were God but as if they were a god of their own making. You don't register with the nickname "God." That is abusive and arrogance to say the least (you take on the same characteristics). The title of the thread was originally "I am God" which I changed more appropriately I thought. There is really nothing more abusive than pretending to be God to reject God. Think of it. You were created by God then you take on God's name.

[Churchwork]

Originally Posted by Churchwork
Since you can't find a naturalistic explanation for the resurrection eyewitness claims, do you realize you are going to Hell?

And since nothing in nature happens all by itself, then you know the universe can't start up by itself, nor can it always have been existing due to the exponential progression of conscience.

I find this to be a bit offensive. You shouldn't go around telling people that are unsure about their beliefs that they will be damned to an eternity in hell for being unsure. Plus, you miss the point which most people have a problem with. Most people don't think that they can figure out another explanation for how Christ was resurrected, they just think that he wasn't resurrected. I understand why you phrase it the way that you do, it's just offensive.
Jesus said if you are not for Him, you are against Him. You are not for Him, so you are against Him. Unless you know your real condition, claiming ignorance is not a valid excuse, then how will you ever get saved? What's offensive is using an excuse of shutting your mind down, don't read the Bible, to not accept what Christ did for you. Don't think this is humility thinking since no naturalistic theory can be maintained that you know of there can still be one. If it hasn't been found out in two millennia, what makes you think it will now? There is such a thing as false humility which is really pompous and arrogant. Those who want to remain in their sin nature can be offended all they want, but this miraculous grace God has given us in His Word is what you shut your mind down to, so be it. God wants to be with those who want to be conscientious, not pleading ignorance all the rest of the days of their lives before they are resurrected to Hell.


Christians are supposed to be accepting of people and different ways of life. How about gentle encouragement to join the flock? I came to this site looking to talk to people about religion, something that is important to me, and something that I am uncertain about. I expected (read: hoped) to find reasoned discussions. I've already posted in the forums, but I find this in my inbox telling me that I'm going to hell?
Being tolerant of people is not the same thing as accepting your way of life. I don't approve of sin, so why should you? There is nothing more gentle than in what Christ did for you on the cross, but this doesn't mean He is not to tell you about the consequences of rejecting what He does for you?

Jesus said, you are already condemned (John 3.18). Jesus doesn't beat around the bush. He tells you of His wonderful grace and love and mercy of the Father, but also of the inevitable consequences of those such as yourself who reject it. Otherwise it is not a true gospel of salvation. Tickling ears is not authentic.


In short, if you want people to listen to you in any situation where you are not preaching to the choir, then you don't want to insult them, or treat them like the religion that most people fear... the one that sold indulgences to poor saps for years. Threatening people will hell if they don't think like you do is no different.
They are not the choir. You reject Jesus. How is that the choir? Of course you are insulted, because you are going to Hell. Why be surprised by this? Christianity doesn't sell indulgences, so you ought not to use invalid arguments? If the Bible speaks against Christendom in Matth. 13 and Rev. 17, then by you speaking against it also, but to reject Christ, is duplicitous on your part. Shame on you! You are not going to Hell because you like or don't like a Christian. You are going to Hell, because you have to go some place, since you can't go to Heaven. Would a loving God let someone like you in the New City? Of course not, because you reject God and the Lamb who will be the center of the New City. I have told you the truth, the truth that will set you free.

The reason I moved this thread to Deism is because deism is the belief in an uncreated creator who is not personally involved, and the original poster seemed to be claiming in the existence of a creator though he rejected God's solution in His Word. However, he also claimed to be God with the nickname God, so that could have fallen under deification or for some eastern religions which teach you are God and God is everything including nature so since you are in nature you are God. However, the thread is definitely under the right category of Non-Trinitarians.

If you come to God with an honest heart, that is the first condition for grace enabling you to be born-again. Therefore, if you are not yet saved, it is because you restrict God's access to your heart. I would pray for you to accept the logic of the proof in nature and a personal God who personally reveals Himself to us, but I also know grace is such an amazing thing to know all things sum in Christ that to get you from being an unregenerate to regenerated with God's life is far deeper than any human can put words to. But once it happens, it is amazing then once-saved-always-saved. It is amazing thing to look back upon your salvation knowing you are chosen by the foundations of the world and can never be lost. Amen.

God is working all things for your good. Every day God is letting me fall more in love with Him, and you can have the same,
http://biblocality.com/forums/mp3playerindex.php?do=viewmp3playerpopup

How does one impart something they have to someone who doesn't have it? Through prayer and showing it. Keep corresponding and you may yet be saved. How does someone learn calculus after knowing just basic math? Read God's Word. Don't let your life pass you by without having read from beginning to end the Bible, perhaps with a good study guide like the most popular one in the world called the Life Application Study Bible with the New Living Translation (http://www.newlivingtranslation.com/05discoverthenlt/details.asp?id=study&isbn=978-0-8423-8508-4). If you are still resisting then read The Spiritual Man (http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/SMCFP.htm) (white cover only) by Watchman Nee to experience not only new birth but the dividing of your spirit, soul and body. Watch some videos (http://biblocality.com/videos.html) to melt that hard heart of yours. I really recommend these Christian movies (http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/ChristianMovies.htm).

How can you stand here and not be moved by God? Nothing is better than this. God should be all you want and all you ever need. He is everything.

[JamesRobert]

I'm sure that this will be my last post here as I have already received an infraction. I'm not entirely sure for what, I've reviewed everything that I wrote, and though much of it was poorly written, I hardly think that this is cause for an infraction. My infraction was for "false teachings", though I taught nothing throughout anything I wrote, I merely stated fact and opinion. If "false teachings" is defined as "disagreeing", then I'm guilty.

I digress... now, onto the meat of what will surely earn me my second infraction.

First, I meant prove as in to show beyond reasonable doubt that those were in fact the events that transpired. We very much believe Jesus was resurrected, but you cannot know it because it cannot be proven. That's just a fact, though I fear we have reduced this to a matter of semantics. I am NOT belittling anyone's faith, just pointing out what I meant when I said it, it's a matter of definitions. No more on that.

If God wants us to "prove everything", why would he punish us for coming to different conclusions about life than He did? After all, He did choose to make us imperfectly. You're also telling me that you would tell someone that you are trying to convert something other than what you believe. That's a sales technique... interesting. If you come to realize that the Bible in inerrant, then that should be the claim that you make from the outset, as it should be self-evident to all that read it.

Now, onto your second quotation. What grace have I personally had? I'm still being punished for something that Adam and Eve did, this was no fault of my own yet I am still being punished for it. I was brought into this world unaware of anything, and only through my own experiences with my family (who I wasn't given the option to choose) do I learn anything about the world. If God didn't want me to be me, then why didn't he make me perfectly?

Also, you completely contradict yourself when you say that God is loving, and in the same breath say that God would never allow an unsaved person to be with the saved. Think about what that contradiction means. God's standard should be different than ours because God is perfect and immortal, therefore above the constraints that we put on ourselves as mortal men and women that have but seventy years on this planet if they are lucky.

Next, on to your third quotation. I stand by what I said. I cannot fathom a world where God would condemn you to an eternity in hell for disobeying some part of the Bible, especially when you admit that the Bible contains errors.

You're right about the technical definition of atheism. I would propose that there is no problem with my thinking, however, as I believe that you and I are both atheists to a point. Atheists just believe in one less god than we do. I stand by my point that atheism is not a cult, however, because if you say that atheism is a cult the so too are Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. That's just not an okay position for a Christian to hold.

On to your fifth quotation. I'm going to concede all of the rest of it, because I didn't know you had changed it. I was wrong to defend their thought process when I didn't know what it was. I will tell you this though, I have read the Bible cover to cover twice... which is sort of asking a lot from a person like me. Also, I have read the other gospels that we have found that did not make it into the Bible, and they are also fascinating (and tell a very different story). Have you read them?

[Churchwork]

I'm sure that this will be my last post here as I have already received an infraction. I'm not entirely sure for what, I've reviewed everything that I wrote, and though much of it was poorly written, I hardly think that this is cause for an infraction. My infraction was for "false teachings", though I taught nothing throughout anything I wrote, I merely stated fact and opinion. If "false teachings" is defined as "disagreeing", then I'm guilty.
By you getting an infraction you are still able to post, so why let this be your last post? You are trying to conceal how ignorant of a person you can be, for it was already explained to you in the infraction your false teaching. In your profile you registered by answering the question, What is Your Primary Work or Gift for the Church? Gifted with the word of wisdom. But you are not a member of the body of Christ to work for the Church, thus have no gifts for the Church. Your other infraction you received was for insulting others because you don't like it presumably when people insult you since you accuse of being insulted. Hence, because you have this double standard, you are being selfish and thus got the appropriate infraction for your double standard. Why is this so hard to understand that you have to post the issue on the forums and falsely represent like you have no idea why you got those infractions? Alas, I am repeating myself, and you are belligerent.



I digress... now, onto the meat of what will surely earn me my second infraction.

First, I meant prove as in to show beyond reasonable doubt that those were in fact the events that transpired. We very much believe Jesus was resurrected, but you cannot know it because it cannot be proven. That's just a fact, though I fear we have reduced this to a matter of semantics. I am NOT belittling anyone's faith, just pointing out what I meant when I said it, it's a matter of definitions. No more on that.

No this discussion is not why you got your very first two infractions, for it was explained to you in a personal email when you got the infractions and reiterated here in this thread.

Jesus is proven to have resurrected because there is no naturalistic explanation for the eyewitness claims. You put forth none. This is not about semantics or belittling your faith in atheism, but the fact that historically the life of Jesus is more well attested than any other human being in antiquity, so lack of material or testimony is not the problem. The problem is you can't find a naturalistic theory that fits the data; hence, that is why you are going to Hell. God puts you in a position where the evidence is overwhelming and you present no challenge to it. Shutting your mind down is not a legitimate approach.

As to your potentially coming 3rd infraction, you will receive it if your argument continues to be to shut your mind down instead of investigating the data for a naturalistic explanation to see if you can make it fit. As it stands the eyewitness accounts truly believed they saw Jesus resurrected. Almost all skeptical scholars concede this point. So the burden is on you to show otherwise. This point has already been stated in this thread, so don't respond with nothing to offer when you present no problem with the eyewitness claims.


If God wants us to "prove everything", why would he punish us for coming to different conclusions about life than He did? After all, He did choose to make us imperfectly. You're also telling me that you would tell someone that you are trying to convert something other than what you believe. That's a sales technique... interesting. If you come to realize that the Bible in inerrant, then that should be the claim that you make from the outset, as it should be self-evident to all that read it.
God doesn't come to conclusions as it were, for He is the creator. He knows what is going to happen. He doesn't make some conclusion. Remember, God has infinite foreknowledge. He responds effectively to all things. Your assumption we are made imperfectly has no basis. We are made perfectly in His image. He punishes you because sin has consequences. Why is that so hard to understand? I am trying to convert someone to something other than what I believe? Where do you come up with that idea? A sales technique? I know it upsets you to realize that Christians don't first assume the Bible to be inerrant, but rather come to that conclusion by the preponderance of evidence of these 66 books after accepting Christ. Do you see how you have several mistaken assumptions here that keep you in the dark and like that great accuser who sins bearing false witness? That's why Step 3 of the 4 Step Perfect Proof for God (http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2256) is part of the proof, because it is illogical to try to disprove God by misrepresenting His approach of how He proves Himself. The 66 books are God's provision for us. It convinces on several levels for you to come to Christ. It shows in the OT you can't keep the law proving you are a sinner. It speaks to your conscience and affects you internally and deeply that you are drawn to Christ to believe in Him for your salvation. The Word of God is not just a convincing instrument, but it is also God's provision for us who are saved to walk therein and do His will. Now the proof is given in these 4 Steps, so where is your challenge?


Now, onto your second quotation. What grace have I personally had? I'm still being punished for something that Adam and Eve did, this was no fault of my own yet I am still being punished for it. I was brought into this world unaware of anything, and only through my own experiences with my family (who I wasn't given the option to choose) do I learn anything about the world. If God didn't want me to be me, then why didn't he make me perfectly?
You are being punished, for sin gets punished, and you will be punished eternally for it because you refuse the remedy. You choose to be eternally separated from God, so God says you are already condemned (John 3.18); that is to say, if you don't make a choice for Christ before you die in this body of flesh and blood, you will surely go to Hell. For you to exist there is no other way for mankind to be born into sin by the first two God-conscious people who rebelled. Just as you should not blame your parents for bringing you into the world, nor should you blame God for the fact that in order for you to exist you would have to be born into sin, because procreation is the only way for people to come into existence. You are made perfectly, but you received a sin nature for the sins of the first Adam. God couldn't do it any better than it was done. That is reality. Deal with it. Stop making childish excuses. it is better this way than not to be created at all, don't you think? If God created Adam and Eve without the option to refuse Him, then that is not perfect, but robots. God wants fellowship with souls who have the choice, not robots. You want a robot maker and you want to be a mindless zombie robot and think that's perfect, but that's not perfect. That's calvinism. That's shutting your mind down to God's great design. Let's say you died for some reason before the age of accountability. You would still be saved, assuming you would have given your life to Christ at some after reaching the age of accountability. God can foresee all contingent possibilities in all world ensembles; but He actualizing this one world because it saves the most and damns the least which authenticates free-will.


Also, you completely contradict yourself when you say that God is loving, and in the same breath say that God would never allow an unsaved person to be with the saved. Think about what that contradiction means. God's standard should be different than ours because God is perfect and immortal, therefore above the constraints that we put on ourselves as mortal men and women that have but seventy years on this planet if they are lucky.
If we lock up a rapist for life because he clearly will never change, why wouldn't God separate this person for forever who forever rejects His atonement who wants to be eternally separated from God? You put on God immoral standards to reflect your own corrupted conscience by bringing together the rapist with his victims and by some catharsis expect there to be some reconciliation, all the while you against God keep rejecting Him and the rapist keeps molesting this same victim. Don't you think that sick minded of you? The more people talk with you, the more they realize what a bad person you are.


Next, on to your third quotation. I stand by what I said. I cannot fathom a world where God would condemn you to an eternity in hell for disobeying some part of the Bible, especially when you admit that the Bible contains errors.
Remember what was said about not misrepresenting God's Word? You are not condemned to an eternity in Hell because you vaguely disobey some part of the Bible, but because you reject the only means of salvation, for there is no other name under heaven by which one can be saved. Unless you confess the Lord Jesus before men as your Savior, He will deny you before the Father in Heaven.

I found no errors in the Bible. Rather, if you did find a secondary error, it wouldn't be enough to reject the central message of God's Word that we all need that perfect sacrifice for our sins, for sin leads to death and the second death which is Hell.

Understand your flesh. Your flesh is trying to fathom some way to find fault with the Bible to reject God, but by my responses you can see you are always wrong in your thinking. You misrepresent, you twist your mind and contort your thoughts, but they are always false. Always! I haven't found one thing you said that is true yet.


You're right about the technical definition of atheism. I would propose that there is no problem with my thinking, however, as I believe that you and I are both atheists to a point. Atheists just believe in one less god than we do. I stand by my point that atheism is not a cult, however, because if you say that atheism is a cult the so too are Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. That's just not an okay position for a Christian to hold.
Atheists believe in no God to be precise, not merely just one less. Hence, it is a contradiction to believe Christians can be atheists. It's impossible. Again, you are wrong. You're always wrong. Yes, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism are all cults at the end of the day. That's exactly the position for a Christian to take because these are all just various ways to reject God's saving grace through His only begotten Son. Look at the various definitions of cult (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cult&r=66) to realize several of the definitions pertain to each of these cults, including atheism and agnosticism.


On to your fifth quotation. I'm going to concede all of the rest of it, because I didn't know you had changed it. I was wrong to defend their thought process when I didn't know what it was. I will tell you this though, I have read the Bible cover to cover twice... which is sort of asking a lot from a person like me. Also, I have read the other gospels that we have found that did not make it into the Bible, and they are also fascinating (and tell a very different story). Have you read them?
Changed what? All I did was change the title, because it's not appropriate for these forums for someone to by starting threads say they are God. You can talk about the theory you are God, but I am trying to disinfect such absurdities at least to some extent.

Why would you consider second and third century writings that directly contradict Scripture as worthy of consideration and somehow think they belong with the 66 books of God's Word? That's illogical. Not even many books in the Septuagint belong in Scripture held to by religious Rome-the Roman Church and Eastern Orthodox.

If you read the Bible twice carefully, then you should know Paul said in 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2, he met Peter, James (brother of Jesus) and John on more than one occasion, whom said they saw Jesus alive from the dead after He died on the cross. Paul gives his own reverse testimony of seeing Jesus resurrected. These Apostles truly believed it. People don't go to their deaths as martyrs for the resurrection claim if they didn't really believe it. Since they really believed it and skeptical scholars concede this fact, because the data is undeniable, then how do you explain it away? Since you can't, receive Jesus into your life to be saved by grace through faith. Nothing is better.

You know what I find most interesting in our talk? It is that God has given me His eternal blessings in eternal life which is also an ability to know Him. You neither have these eternal blessings nor an ability to know Him, because you don't have eternal life. You have only eternal damnation. God has not given you the grace to believe in Him and His only begotten Son. What I am really fascinated by is how people put up walls to block God from coming into their hearts. I think learning more about this will help me to help lead people to Christ, because I can find out where it is they put up a wall. For example, with you, you mention various things which I have responded to. But they in themselves are not really the reason I don't think. They are just things you are looking to to blame God and reject God and even deny His existence from your already locked in position of independency against God. I know that logical arguments are not going to convince you, even though God says these natural proofs are His proof. They condemn you. Some people will accept them, but others don't. What will convince you to receive salvation is my finding out what your deeper inner issue really is against God, giving you the truth of that mistaken assumption (actually getting you to come to the truth of that mistaken assumption on your own with a little coaxing by me) and for that we would have to talk about your personal issues of what you have experienced in life even from when you were a young child. There are things in your life that sparked a blaming attitude against God, so regression therapy will be most useful.

By regression, I mean simply talking about, was there a point in your life you did believe in God? Have you always rejected God? What hardships have you encountered in life that may have been used as a blaming point? If you would prefer to talk by personal email or private message about more sensitive issues, we can do that. I can strip away for you the point where you really separated yourself from God. Once you realize the truth of that situation, you will remove a barrier to God and it will be quite easy to accept Him and His redemptive design. You would be surprised how easy it can be once a couple of key blockages are removed. They are not that hard to find if you allow yourself to talk to a Christian about them for we are guided by the Holy Spirit to the truth. You know by intuition what are stumbling points in your past experiences with people, work, etc. Let your intuition examine and bring your memory to those areas of your life. Ask yourself what you are assuming in those scenarios. Then ask what the truth of those assumptions are. If they are founded in reality there is no problem. But some assumptions are killing you. You carry them around inside of you even subconsciously and don't even have access to them unless you do some work in bringing them out with someone who can help you who has the Holy Spirit to bring them to the surface to examine.

[DD2014]

Jesus is proven to have resurrected because there is no naturalistic explanation for the eyewitness claims.

Explanation = They all lied.

You cannot deny that its a possibility.

[Churchwork]

Explanation = They all lied.

You cannot deny that its a possibility.
We can deny that is a possibility because people don't go to their deaths for something they know to be a lie. That is, they truly believed it. Since you can find no cases of people in history dying for something they know to be a lie, then you know the disciples truly believed they saw Jesus resurrected.

Try again.

[DD2014]

people don't go to their deaths for something they know to be a lie.

www.capitolhillblue.com/blog/2006/03/soldiers_in_iraq_know_they_are.html (http://www.capitolhillblue.com/blog/2006/03/soldiers_in_iraq_know_they_are.html)

[Churchwork]

www.capitolhillblue.com/blog/2006/03/soldiers_in_iraq_know_they_are.html (http://www.capitolhillblue.com/blog/2006/03/soldiers_in_iraq_know_they_are.html)
Nothing there about people dying for something they know to be a lie. Soldiers fight because they stand for their jobs. They believe in their contract not to be court marshaled.

[DD2014]

Nothing there about people dying for something they know to be a lie. Soldiers fight because they stand for their jobs. They believe in their contract not to be court marshaled.

Exactly! Christians did not die for lies. They died for money, power and control. If you can make anyone under your little "Jesus spell" follow self-contraditary rules and laws why not make them give you 10% of their money or have them vote for someone you want to take power? It makes more sense then this: A virgin having sex with a ghost then giving birth to a man-god. We only have about 3 years of his life in any historical book and it contradicts its self on matters to important to get wrong (example: what were Jesus' last words? "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." [Luke 23:46]? or "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" [Mark 15:34] it also could have been "It is finished." [John 19:30]

If they are not liers, why coulden't they be consistant about Jesus' words before he died?

[Churchwork]

Christians did not die for lies. They died for money, power and control. If you can make anyone under your little "Jesus spell" follow self-contraditary rules and laws why not make them give you 10% of their money or have them vote for someone you want to take power? It makes more sense then this: A virgin having sex with a ghost then giving birth to a man-god. We only have about 3 years of his life in any historical book and it contradicts its self on matters to important to get wrong (example: what were Jesus' last words? "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." [Luke 23:46]? or "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" [Mark 15:34] it also could have been "It is finished." [John 19:30]

If they are not liers, why coulden't they be consistant about Jesus' words before he died?
Scriptures never said Mary had sex with a ghost. Why misread?

What self contradictory rules, do tell?

You're missing the point. What were are talking about are eyewitness accounts, not for just believing some idea or principle of subsequent Christians after Jesus was taken up.

None of the Apostles had any money that we know of. Paul finished off renting an apartment in Rome before he was put to death in the Neronian persecution of Christians.

Jesus is showing perfect humility. Why does this offend you? Is it not because you are like Satan, independent and hostile to God?

Can't you see the words of Jesus reflect a perfect atonement for us? He must be forsaken by God the Father to pay for our sins. The Father and Son agreed this would take place before the foundations of the world.