Question

Once again.... what evidence is this? From what I gathered in your last post to me, you told me nothing but what some people believe.

 

You just lied. You're obviously new age...or agnostic/atheist. And new agers/atheist/agnostics do, just what it says:

"don't recognise Him as God, nor honor or glorify
him as god or give him thanks"

Yup, it came true alright.

 

Ryupower

If you say so.

Occam

 

Ryupower.

Only if you believe the people who assembled and edited the bible.
Were not the BIG FAT LIARS.

THEY had the motive. They can write in ANYTHING they wanted
to about what jesus said.
And they did.

Occam

 

Soulrebel51

Simply put. [indicative evidence]
The fact that massive oganisation exists in reality and continues to
process to a greater complexity.

Occam

 

the gospel of john was the LAST of the 4 canonical gospel to be recorded (prolly between 90 & 110 c.e.)...
it was composed from sources independent of matthew, luke, and mark (the earliest) & their earlier sources & traditions (including "Q")...
the johannine texts may indeed have a direct "apostolic" link through "john the elder" (& the one who dictated the document being "john the younger")...

i'm not making this stuff up folks...

now, as to paul (saul of tarsus) actually "knowing" jesus...
nope, paul himself said that he did not know jesus in the flesh...
he certainly had face-to-face discussions with the leaders of "the jerusalem church" (the jewish-christian followers of the way, those who were witness to the ministry of jesus & called him messiah, the one who came in fulfiullment of the prophecies of their ancestors --- including peter, james the just (the brother of jesus), and stephen (the first christain martyr, quite possibly killed at the instigation of saul the staunch jewish heretic hunter!)
paul first "met" jesus (probably several years after the events of easter and pentecost) (the death and resurrection of jesus, his ascension into heaven to sit at the right hand of the father, and the descent of the promised comforter, the holy spirit) on the road to damascus, during which a VISION of jesus asked saul "why dost thou persecute me?", after which saul was blinded for 3 days & taken care of by followers of the way, & after which he repented of his perscuting those jews who followed jesus as messiah, and became baptised into the new covenenant & changed his name to paul...
and proceded to spead the word (in his fashion) to audiences which were increasing gentile (gentiles who hung around jewish synagogues & stopped believing in "pagan" pantheons & started believing in the god of abraham, jacob, & isaac... but did dnot actually convert to being full jews (involving circumcision for males & sexual, dietary, workaday, and other lifestyle changes ) were called "god-fearing gentiles" & were a sort of natural audience for paul ---> because according to his lights, if one accepts jesus as messiah (= "christ" = "annointed one"), then one can be fully adopted a child of abraham (with all the "benefits" thereof) without going through all the "rigamarole" of actually converting to judaism...
this was the main reason that he was called to jerusalem - the "community of saints" (the jerusalem jewish-christians - quite possibly hundreds or even thousands strong, led by james the brother of jesus) were quite willing to accept the money offerings collected by paul from his (often mostly gentile) converts out in the sticks & sent to the holy city, but were less than happy about his seeming abandonment of full observance of jewish laws...



'nuff for now?

 

And how does this prove there is any god?

 

I believe Occam did not say "prove," he used the word "support."

And if you think about it, it does support the existance of an indeterminate god. But not a specific one.

 

But it doesn't prove anything. Just because some people think that it supports the evidence of a god, doesn't mean its real.

 

"If he wasn't the son of God, than he was not a good man, but a BIG FAT LIER who was full of Pride and Blasphemy.

Either he was, or he wasn't the son of God; either he was sinless, or just full of sin."

I believe Jesus' message was pure and true. He taught that God was in all of us. ie, everyone is holy. I dont remember who i was reading, but he believed that Jesus was the first one to preach the goodness of man. Jesus taught that everyone could reach the kingdom of God within themselves, because God is in everything. I believe his followers just twisted his words, and took his teachings a bit too literally.

 

Soulrebel51

As hicky said... it is supportive or indicative evidence.
And the 'number' of people that think it supports the existance of
'a god'
Is irellevant.

What is a god?

Well common belief is that a god [and lets say ONE god..not many as in some religions] made or runs the whole show called reality.
Our observation of reality has revealed a structural complexity to
boggle the mind in even the smallest of natural/real structures.
There is more structural complexity/information in a blade of grass than
all the information in the library of congress.

This structureal complexity/organisation. INDICATES PLANNING.
As such is unlikely to occur as a result of random association.
[in our experience]

Many religous say there is no evolution cause humans are not the
result of chance and a puddle of primal goo.
And occam agrees.
But can see no problem with evolution being he way a 'god'
might actually create. Directly or through manipulated objective laws..[starting with a puddle of goo]

All of the above is INDICATIVE evidence...And yes..it is a matter
of interpretation..
Which leaves occam with 'insufficient data' to verify the existance
of a 'god' [and everyone else as well]

Thus he is an agnostic...
He can be nothing else without lying to himself.

Occam

PS..And all is complicated by the occams belief that there ARE
races out there with technology/paratechnology that gives them
the powers we would attribute to god.
So what is a god?

 

Colours

Agree totally.

Organised religion cant have people thinking they can reach god
within themselves..God must be exterior or you cant manipulate
people with carrots and sticks [heaven and hell]
Organised religion is managment layer between the god they created
from the inspiration of jesus. [or mohammed. exct exct]
And the masses they wish to control.

People that say humans could/would never do this have obviously read
NO human history.
[an example of how easy it is to manipulate the 'masses' thats us.
We all were taught WW2 was the good allies against the evil germans.
Yes...
Then how did Large american corporations continue to make a profit
from subsidery plants in germany during the war?
Thats right..US owned companies MADE PROFIT from ball bearings
made in germany and used in Foke-wulf interceptors..
That were shooting down US bombers.
OR
Why were there big red circles on the maps used by bomber crews
That meant..'dont bomb here"?
Inside the circles were ford factories]

All MANAGMENt HAS TO DO..is get such as 'official history' into
the eduction system..From then on it becomes 'percieved truth'.

This is EXACTLY what organised religion does.
It was a black day in religions 'hell' when religion was banned from the classroom.. And a new day for free thought and reason.

Occam

 

Than howcome the whole entire old testament prophecied these things?
If you say it's wrong, than the Old testament must've been edited too...

 

Did you just commit blasphemy? Jesus said (and so does the OT) that blasphemy's sin. There's a difference between having the Holy Spirit in you (which only believers do) and claiming that everyone's God. You *seem* to be claiming the seconed one.

 

ryupower

So it's ok by you if god says rebelious sons should be stoned to death.
As long as there are 'prophesies' for you to be amazed over?


Occam

 

Ryupower

How do you know you have a holy spirit in you?
And that ONLY BELIEVERS DO?

Someone told you you did..and you believe them.
Because your now part of an exclusive club
Your special.
Now you argue THEIR BELIEFS [not yours]
And then you come here and tell everyone ..
YOU KNOW IT IS TRUE. When you actually know nothing
but what someone else said is true.

THATS how easy it is 'to manipulate people'
Give them what they think they want..and they will
follow you anywhere.

Occam

 

well...you see what it has brought us in our society now? Youths nowadays are taking drugs, having sex with everything that moves, disobeying their parents, killing people, etc.etc.

Sometimes I believe that that law should have been kept. At least we wouldn't have such social issues nowadays.

 

I kow it's true. For one, the Bible says so. And two, -I can pray in tongues.

Once a person gets saved, the Holy Spirit will live within him/her, and once a person gets baptized by the Holy spirit, they will increase in many areas of the spiritual being, with the evidence of tongues.

 

stunning.

and how would you propose we measure "rebellion"? would a naughty 4 year old refusing to eat his brussels sprouts be guilty and obliged to be stoned to death?

do you really feel that the appropriate punishment for a child's rebellion is death?

actually, forget that - do you really feel that rebellion (a show of defiance against established convention, i.e. CHANGE), is an offense?

there are a million things wrong with what you just said.

who's going to keep all the fathers in the right place?
if occam were your father, and he lived by your law, you'd be dead now.

 

The rebellion, as you see it, is just that- random rebellion. What the OT's talking about is someone who does nothing but be rebellious, as in NEVER obeying their parents,- rather do their own thing.

And the OT is more referring to adolescents, not 4 year olds. 4 year olds don't even know about concequences, -that's why they get the wooden spoon, so that they learn about these things.