Keith posted:

The Truth About the Trinity

John 14:26-27

The word Trinity cannot be found in the Bible, but the truth of it can. While there’s only one God, the Godhead consists of three distinct persons—the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All are equally omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal, and unchanging, but each is unique in function.

 

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are equal in their divine attributes. Yet each one relates to mankind in a different way because He has a specific role in our life. It’s very important to understand this distinction: We do not have three gods; we have one God in three persons functioning uniquely and perfectly.

In what language does this make sense?

You will not find anyone saying that three UNIQUE things are really ONE thing.

skeldon_man posted:
Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Keith, I am a little confused. Is Jesus the son of god or god? My wife who is a Christian told me he is god. Which one is true? I know he cannot be both.

Answer: The Bible never records Jesus saying the precise words, "I am God." That does not mean, however, that He did not proclaim that He is God. Take for example Jesus’ words in John 10:30, "I and the Father are one." We need only to look at the Jews’ reaction to His statement to know He was claiming to be God. They tried to stone Him for this very reason: "You, a mere man, claim to be God" (John 10:33). The Jews understood exactly what Jesus was claiming deity. When Jesus declared, "I and the Father are one," He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence. John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth before Abraham was born, I am!" Jews who heard this statement responded by taking up stones to kill Him for blasphemy, as the Mosaic Law commanded (Leviticus 24:16).

John reiterates the concept of Jesus’ deity: "The Word (Jesus) was God" and "the Word became flesh" (John 1:1, 14).....boy they going to be questions on this statement , anyway, as I was saying, these verses clearly indicate that Jesus is God in the flesh. Acts 20:28 tells us, "Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood." Who bought the church with His own blood? Jesus Christ. And this same verse declares that God purchased His church with His own blood. Therefore, Jesus is God!

Thomas the disciple declared concerning Jesus, "My Lord and my God" (John 20:28). Jesus does not correct him. Titus 2:13 encourages us to wait for the coming of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ (see also 2 Peter 1:1). In Hebrews 1:8, the Father declares of Jesus, "But about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.’" The Father refers to Jesus as "O God," indicating that Jesus is indeed God.

In Revelation, an angel instructed the apostle John to only worship God that's in Revelation 19:10. Several times in Scripture Jesus receives worship (Matthew 2:11; 14:33; 28:9, 17; Luke 24:52; John 9:38). He never rebukes people for worshiping Him. If Jesus were not God, He would have told people to not worship Him, just as the angel in Revelation did. There are many other passages of Scripture that argue for Jesus’ deity.

The most important reason that Jesus has to be God is that, if He is not God, His death would not have been sufficient to pay the penalty for the sins of the world (1 John 2:2). A created being, which Jesus would be if He were not God, could not pay the infinite penalty required for sin against an infinite God. Only God could pay such an infinite penalty. Only God could take on the sins of the world (2 Corinthians 5:21), die, and be resurrected, proving His victory over sin and death.

I hope this help explain what your wife was trying too.

Good Morning Brother Keith. Does this mean God lost faith in himself while he was on the cross? When Jesus died and was buried, on the third day he was ascended into heaven. So did god die then? What happened to the two days when he was dead? Who took care of all the living things in the world for the two days? Why did god suffer before he died?

Instead of asking me read the Bible for yourself and you will get the revelation as to what happen and whether God die as you put it.

ksazma posted:

The trouble brother Keith is if I were to post passages before and after the ones I want to discuss they will contradict each other. Is that really what you want to do?

Here we go about contradiction again, you're funny. How long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in? Could you site your verses from it that way we know where to find it. Thanks.

Stop dodging the question and answer it. It's that simple. Just one question, that's all.

ksazma all along you have refuse to accept my explanations for things because it doesn't fit your agenda nor your preconceived ideas of what you think Christianity is.

Well, enlighten us about your belief tell us how long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in?

ksazma posted:

The trouble brother Keith is if I were to post passages before and after the ones I want to discuss they will contradict each other. Is that really what you want to do?

Why not post it then and point out the contradiction instead of talking about it, you are all talk and no action. Lets have it post and while you at it take action on the following for us.

How long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in?

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

The trouble brother Keith is if I were to post passages before and after the ones I want to discuss they will contradict each other. Is that really what you want to do?

Here we go about contradiction again, you're funny. How long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in? Could you site your verses from it that way we know where to find it. Thanks.

Stop dodging the question and answer it. It's that simple. Just one question, that's all.

I am not dodging anything dude. I am competent enough if I want to. However, I didn't care to have a sermon on GNI and I don't intend to now. My sole objective is to point out the weakness in your 'truths'.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

The trouble brother Keith is if I were to post passages before and after the ones I want to discuss they will contradict each other. Is that really what you want to do?

Here we go about contradiction again, you're funny. How long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in? Could you site your verses from it that way we know where to find it. Thanks.

Stop dodging the question and answer it. It's that simple. Just one question, that's all.

I am not dodging anything dude. I am competent enough if I want to. However, I didn't care to have a sermon on GNI and I don't intend to now. My sole objective is to point out the weakness in your 'truths'.

Just answer the question then. How long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in? It's that simple. Just one question, that's all.

Keith posted:

ksazma all along you have refuse to accept my explanations for things because it doesn't fit your agenda nor your preconceived ideas of what you think Christianity is.

Well, enlighten us about your belief tell us how long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in?

Actually I don't have any problems with what you believe. That is your right. I involve myself only when you claim that what you preach is absolutely truths because that effectively excludes everyone.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

ksazma all along you have refuse to accept my explanations for things because it doesn't fit your agenda nor your preconceived ideas of what you think Christianity is.

Well, enlighten us about your belief tell us how long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in?

Actually I don't have any problems with what you believe. That is your right. I involve myself only when you claim that what you preach is absolutely truths because that effectively excludes everyone.

Just answer the question then. How long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in? It's that simple. Just one question, that's all.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
 

ksazma, that book you read, how long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth? Could you site your verses from it that way we know where to find it. Thanks.

Did someone advise you to ask this. Be careful what you wish for. You have no idea how shaky that six day creation idea is.

Don't need an advisor, just answer my question. How long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in? It's that simple.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

The trouble brother Keith is if I were to post passages before and after the ones I want to discuss they will contradict each other. Is that really what you want to do?

Here we go about contradiction again, you're funny. How long it say it take God to create the heavens and earth according that book you believe in? Could you site your verses from it that way we know where to find it. Thanks.

Stop dodging the question and answer it. It's that simple. Just one question, that's all.

I am not dodging anything dude. I am competent enough if I want to. However, I didn't care to have a sermon on GNI and I don't intend to now. My sole objective is to point out the weakness in your 'truths'.

We don't need to have a sermon just a simple discussion and I promise, it will take me less than a hundred words to respond or even less. I am a man of my words.

By the way, have you found your contradiction yet?

ksazma posted:

"Jesus said in the Bible that he of himself can do nothing. It is by the finger of God that he cast out devils. What kind of God can do nothing. Imagine that he didn't say he couldn't do some things but that he couldn't do anything at all without God's help.

So brother Keith, since you are such an exemplary reader and understander of the written words, did Jesus say that he of his own self can do nothing? Yes or no?"

Keith posted:
"Why don't you post the entire chapters here? Don't even go that far post three verses before and three verses after Jesus made that statement. Post it for us to read."

ksazma posted:

"The trouble brother Keith is if I were to post passages before and after the ones I want to discuss they will contradict each other. Is that really what you want to do?"

Keith posted:
"Why not post it then and point out the contradiction instead of talking about it, you are all talk and no action. Lets have it post and while you at it take action on the following for us."

I am still waiting...... as I said before, all along you have refuse to accept my explanations for things because it doesn't fit your agenda nor your preconceived ideas.

Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously. I only intend to point out matters from your postings that don't make sense. According to the Watchtower folks, there are more than 20,000 mistakes in the Bible. There are hundreds of contradictions also. I just posted about four and you choose to deny them. Yet you boastfully ask for others when you have failed to acknowledge those.

I was never interested in your explanations. Everyone's explanation would be different based on their understanding, exposure and inclinations. I was only interested in an honest acknowledgment of the actual words in the text. In my opinion that should have been very easy since the words are in black and white and in English. Unfortunately that simple honest response seen too much a challenge for you.

Keep your preaching for when you are in church. Expect differing positions when you are on social media.

Jesus said that "my father is greater than all". How can Jesus or even the Holy Spirit be equal to God in light of Jesus' comment here? You still don't see that as a contradiction? How many more should I post when you are intent on denying the written words?

ksazma posted:

Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously. I only intend to point out matters from your postings that don't make sense. According to the Watchtower folks, there are more than 20,000 mistakes in the Bible. There are hundreds of contradictions also. I just posted about four and you choose to deny them. Yet you boastfully ask for others when you have failed to acknowledge those.

What I want you to do besides answering my question you keep evading is to post the contradiction you failed to present so far. 

ksazma posted:

Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously. I only intend to point out matters from your postings that don't make sense. According to the Watchtower folks, there are more than 20,000 mistakes in the Bible. There are hundreds of contradictions also. I just posted about four and you choose to deny them. Yet you boastfully ask for others when you have failed to acknowledge those.

Funny you have some nerve to talk about ignoring questions, you are such a hypocrite. You questions are being ignore because you failed to answer my question and why should I keep answering questions that were already answered go and reread all the post in relation to the five questions you asked.

Are you still going to run away from my question?

I'll make this plain again. I am not answering your questions until you answer my questions. In case you forgot here it is again.

How long did it take God to create to heaven and earth according to your belief in the holy book.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously. I only intend to point out matters from your postings that don't make sense. According to the Watchtower folks, there are more than 20,000 mistakes in the Bible. There are hundreds of contradictions also. I just posted about four and you choose to deny them. Yet you boastfully ask for others when you have failed to acknowledge those.

What I want you to do besides answering my question you keep evading is to post the contradiction you failed to present so far. 

I haven't failed to present anything dude. I can post hundreds of contradictions right now but I don't care to cut and paste large passages like you do. I ask a short question and don't care to read a two page response that doesn't answer the question. But if it brings you comfort to believe that I am evading something go right ahead.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously. I only intend to point out matters from your postings that don't make sense. According to the Watchtower folks, there are more than 20,000 mistakes in the Bible. There are hundreds of contradictions also. I just posted about four and you choose to deny them. Yet you boastfully ask for others when you have failed to acknowledge those.

What I want you to do besides answering my question you keep evading is to post the contradiction you failed to present so far. 

I haven't failed to present anything dude. I can post hundreds of contradictions right now but I don't care to cut and paste large passages like you do. I ask a short question and don't care to read a two page response that doesn't answer the question. But if it brings you comfort to believe that I am evading something go right ahead.

Let's start with the most recent contradiction you brag about in previous post and while you at it don't forget to answer my question.

ksazma are you going to answer my question? Yes/No? 

For the record choosing NO or choosing to EVADE my question will not get you an answer to any of your questions.

Is that clear enough for you ksazma, stop being an hypocrite and answer the question.

Keith posted:

You have this agenda to discredit the Bible but you failed. You have chosen the wrong post to jump on my friend.

You are showing your incompetences everyday. Come on be a man and answer the my question.

Only in your mind do you believe that I have failed. I have shown that the God of the Bible or its writers are confused. I have shown that Jesus is not really gentle but is actually a bigoted and ill mannered person who calls people names like dogs, pigs, pricks, swing, etc. I have shown that even little kids are more knowledgeable than Jesus and he himself confessed that he of his own can do NOTHING. I have shown that Jesus has no Godly qualities. If it makes you feel better of yourself by thinking that I am showing my incompetence then go right away. Notice how I use my own words in my argument while you rely on someone else's work? And lastly. I never had any intention to do any pontifications here so why do you think I would relent to your cravings. You are not that special to me and if I were to start there you would find yourself at a bigger disadvantage. Until you are able to express things in your own words, you are not in a position to tell another person that they are incompetent.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously. I only intend to point out matters from your postings that don't make sense. According to the Watchtower folks, there are more than 20,000 mistakes in the Bible. There are hundreds of contradictions also. I just posted about four and you choose to deny them. Yet you boastfully ask for others when you have failed to acknowledge those.

Funny you have some nerve to talk about ignoring questions, you are such a hypocrite. You questions are being ignore because you failed to answer my question and why should I keep answering questions that were already answered go and reread all the post in relation to the five questions you asked.

Are you still going to run away from my question?

I'll make this plain again. I am not answering your questions until you answer my questions. In case you forgot here it is again.

How long did it take God to create to heaven and earth according to your belief in the holy book.

So now I am a hypocrite. Your Christian values are beginning to get clearer. How can I be a hypocrite for refusing to answer a question when I clearly told you that I don't intend to change the subject of your topic?

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

You have this agenda to discredit the Bible but you failed. You have chosen the wrong post to jump on my friend.

You are showing your incompetences everyday. Come on be a man and answer the my question.

Only in your mind do you believe that I have failed. I have shown that the God of the Bible or its writers are confused. I have shown that Jesus is not really gentle but is actually a bigoted and ill mannered person who calls people names like dogs, pigs, pricks, swing, etc. I have shown that even little kids are more knowledgeable than Jesus and he himself confessed that he of his own can do NOTHING. I have shown that Jesus has no Godly qualities. If it makes you feel better of yourself by thinking that I am showing my incompetence then go right away. Notice how I use my own words in my argument while you rely on someone else's work? And lastly. I never had any intention to do any pontifications here so why do you think I would relent to your cravings. You are not that special to me and if I were to start there you would find yourself at a bigger disadvantage. Until you are able to express things in your own words, you are not in a position to tell another person that they are incompetent.

And I have shown how incompetent and evasive you are. You just cannot answer a simple question. 

Keith posted:

ksazma are you going to answer my question? Yes/No? 

For the record choosing NO or choosing to EVADE my question will not get you an answer to any of your questions.

Is that clear enough for you ksazma, stop being an hypocrite and answer the question.

Dude, I don't care for you to answer any of my observations. I make them in response to things that you post as in you posting that the three are separate but the same. Your response doesn't change the merit of my observation. Because of all the inconsistencies in the Bible, almost every argument can be competently opposed so me doing so is not a terrible strain on my resources. Don't for one moment think that I would be affected if you don't respond to them.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

You have this agenda to discredit the Bible but you failed. You have chosen the wrong post to jump on my friend.

You are showing your incompetences everyday. Come on be a man and answer the my question.

Only in your mind do you believe that I have failed. I have shown that the God of the Bible or its writers are confused. I have shown that Jesus is not really gentle but is actually a bigoted and ill mannered person who calls people names like dogs, pigs, pricks, swing, etc. I have shown that even little kids are more knowledgeable than Jesus and he himself confessed that he of his own can do NOTHING. I have shown that Jesus has no Godly qualities. If it makes you feel better of yourself by thinking that I am showing my incompetence then go right away. Notice how I use my own words in my argument while you rely on someone else's work? And lastly. I never had any intention to do any pontifications here so why do you think I would relent to your cravings. You are not that special to me and if I were to start there you would find yourself at a bigger disadvantage. Until you are able to express things in your own words, you are not in a position to tell another person that they are incompetent.

And I have shown how incompetent and evasive you are. You just cannot answer a simple question. 

Only in your mind you would think that you have done anything. I have told you before that you are not dealing with a rookie.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously. I only intend to point out matters from your postings that don't make sense. According to the Watchtower folks, there are more than 20,000 mistakes in the Bible. There are hundreds of contradictions also. I just posted about four and you choose to deny them. Yet you boastfully ask for others when you have failed to acknowledge those.

Funny you have some nerve to talk about ignoring questions, you are such a hypocrite. You questions are being ignore because you failed to answer my question and why should I keep answering questions that were already answered go and reread all the post in relation to the five questions you asked.

Are you still going to run away from my question?

I'll make this plain again. I am not answering your questions until you answer my questions. In case you forgot here it is again.

How long did it take God to create to heaven and earth according to your belief in the holy book.

So now I am a hypocrite. Your Christian values are beginning to get clearer. How can I be a hypocrite for refusing to answer a question when I clearly told you that I don't intend to change the subject of your topic?

You speak about I ignoring questions and yet here you are doing the same. See why I called you an hypocrite   Don't take it personally.

Think for a moment. Do you think you possess the self control that I have where no one can make me do anything I don't want to do? How many time have you said, answer the question? Lost count? I don't dance to other peoples' music dude.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

You have this agenda to discredit the Bible but you failed. You have chosen the wrong post to jump on my friend.

You are showing your incompetences everyday. Come on be a man and answer the my question.

Only in your mind do you believe that I have failed. I have shown that the God of the Bible or its writers are confused. I have shown that Jesus is not really gentle but is actually a bigoted and ill mannered person who calls people names like dogs, pigs, pricks, swing, etc. I have shown that even little kids are more knowledgeable than Jesus and he himself confessed that he of his own can do NOTHING. I have shown that Jesus has no Godly qualities. If it makes you feel better of yourself by thinking that I am showing my incompetence then go right away. Notice how I use my own words in my argument while you rely on someone else's work? And lastly. I never had any intention to do any pontifications here so why do you think I would relent to your cravings. You are not that special to me and if I were to start there you would find yourself at a bigger disadvantage. Until you are able to express things in your own words, you are not in a position to tell another person that they are incompetent.

And I have shown how incompetent and evasive you are. You just cannot answer a simple question. 

Only in your mind you would think that you have done anything. I have told you before that you are not dealing with a rookie.

I don't care who you are, pro or whatever you call yourself. You will be check and put in place. You messed with the wrong post my friend. You brought the smoke and you have to stand the heat.

ksazma posted:

Think for a moment. Do you think you possess the self control that I have where no one can make me do anything I don't want to do? How many time have you said, answer the question? Lost count? I don't dance to other peoples' music dude.

At least you get my message. 

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously. I only intend to point out matters from your postings that don't make sense. According to the Watchtower folks, there are more than 20,000 mistakes in the Bible. There are hundreds of contradictions also. I just posted about four and you choose to deny them. Yet you boastfully ask for others when you have failed to acknowledge those.

Funny you have some nerve to talk about ignoring questions, you are such a hypocrite. You questions are being ignore because you failed to answer my question and why should I keep answering questions that were already answered go and reread all the post in relation to the five questions you asked.

Are you still going to run away from my question?

I'll make this plain again. I am not answering your questions until you answer my questions. In case you forgot here it is again.

How long did it take God to create to heaven and earth according to your belief in the holy book.

So now I am a hypocrite. Your Christian values are beginning to get clearer. How can I be a hypocrite for refusing to answer a question when I clearly told you that I don't intend to change the subject of your topic?

You speak about I ignoring question and here you are doing the same. You now see why I called you an hypocrite ��

I didn't say that you ignore questions. I said that you give what you think the words mean instead of acknowledge what the words say. I don't care about what you believe. It is your right to believe what you choose to believe. I wanted to know from you if the words said what I stated they said. There are only two possible answers. One being that those words are not in the Bible and the other being, yes, Jesus said them. What you believe they mean and what I believe they mean are up to us. By not acknowledging that the words are there is quite interesting.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Think for a moment. Do you think you possess the self control that I have where no one can make me do anything I don't want to do? How many time have you said, answer the question? Lost count? I don't dance to other peoples' music dude.

At least you get my message. 

This is laughable.

Keith posted:
 

I don't care who you are, pro or whatever you call yourself. You will be check and put in place. You messed with the wrong post my friend. You brought the smoke and you have to stand the heat.

Now I am shaking in my boots. Nothing like a threat from a Christian.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously. I only intend to point out matters from your postings that don't make sense. According to the Watchtower folks, there are more than 20,000 mistakes in the Bible. There are hundreds of contradictions also. I just posted about four and you choose to deny them. Yet you boastfully ask for others when you have failed to acknowledge those.

Funny you have some nerve to talk about ignoring questions, you are such a hypocrite. You questions are being ignore because you failed to answer my question and why should I keep answering questions that were already answered go and reread all the post in relation to the five questions you asked.

Are you still going to run away from my question?

I'll make this plain again. I am not answering your questions until you answer my questions. In case you forgot here it is again.

How long did it take God to create to heaven and earth according to your belief in the holy book.

So now I am a hypocrite. Your Christian values are beginning to get clearer. How can I be a hypocrite for refusing to answer a question when I clearly told you that I don't intend to change the subject of your topic?

You speak about I ignoring question and here you are doing the same. You now see why I called you an hypocrite ��

I didn't say that you ignore questions. I said that you give what you think the words mean instead of acknowledge what the words say. I don't care about what you believe. It is your right to believe what you choose to believe. I wanted to know from you if the words said what I stated they said. There are only two possible answers. One being that those words are not in the Bible and the other being, yes, Jesus said them. What you believe they mean and what I believe they mean are up to us. By not acknowledging that the words are there is quite interesting.

I told you are showing your incompetence. Always read before you speak or in this case before you post my friend.

ksazma posted: "Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously."

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
 

So now I am a hypocrite. Your Christian values are beginning to get clearer. How can I be a hypocrite for refusing to answer a question when I clearly told you that I don't intend to change the subject of your topic?

You speak about I ignoring questions and yet here you are doing the same. See why I called you an hypocrite   Don't take it personally.

I don't take anything here personally dude. Especially anything from people who are chained to the belief that the English meaning of the Bible is not the same as the English meaning everywhere else. Only in the Bible red doesn't mean read and blue doesn't mean blue and two whoring sisters actually mean two places. Oh yes, the two whoring sisters liking their men to have penises the sizes of horses with huge ejaculations does not mean two whoring sisters liking their men to have penises the sizes of horses with huge ejaculations. Only in the Bible.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
 

I don't care who you are, pro or whatever you call yourself. You will be check and put in place. You messed with the wrong post my friend. You brought the smoke and you have to stand the heat.

Now I am shaking in my boots. Nothing like a threat from a Christian.

No threat a promise that I can guarantee. 

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
 

I didn't say that you ignore questions. I said that you give what you think the words mean instead of acknowledge what the words say. I don't care about what you believe. It is your right to believe what you choose to believe. I wanted to know from you if the words said what I stated they said. There are only two possible answers. One being that those words are not in the Bible and the other being, yes, Jesus said them. What you believe they mean and what I believe they mean are up to us. By not acknowledging that the words are there is quite interesting.

I told you are showing your incompetence. Always read before you speak or in this case before you post my friend.

ksazma posted: "Given that you choose to ignore all the ones I already posted Keith, why would I take you seriously."

'All the ones I already posted' are related to the contradictions. When I refer to you ignoring questions, they are related to you giving your understanding of what Jesus meant instead of just acknowledging what he said. They are two separate things.

Keith posted:

It's not a one way conversation, you asked your questions I answered. Now I am asking and you evading. Let have a discussion, answers my ONLY question what are you afraid of? Are you afraid of eating your own words

You are quite a cocky character dude.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
 

I don't care who you are, pro or whatever you call yourself. You will be check and put in place. You messed with the wrong post my friend. You brought the smoke and you have to stand the heat.

Now I am shaking in my boots. Nothing like a threat from a Christian.

No threat a promise that I can guarantee. 

Dude, you couldn't even demonstrate that you can read English.

Either your reading is lacking or your honesty is.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
 

I don't care who you are, pro or whatever you call yourself. You will be check and put in place. You messed with the wrong post my friend. You brought the smoke and you have to stand the heat.

Now I am shaking in my boots. Nothing like a threat from a Christian.

No threat a promise that I can guarantee. 

Dude, you couldn't even demonstrate that you can read English.

Either your reading is lacking or your honesty is.

I do know I understand english far better than you. So while you read I would interpret the language for you since there is a lack of understanding on your part.  

You are making a spectacle of yourself. 

God in Three Persons

Matthew 28:18-20

Years ago, after I preached about God’s Spirit, a woman came up after church to complain, “Why do you talk about the Holy Spirit when people need to hear about Jesus and God?” Sometimes even those who have been Christians for a long time regard the Trinity as a hierarchy. To their way of thinking, the Father is God, Jesus is slightly beneath Him in rank and seniority, and the Holy Spirit is their servant. While this may conform to human models of authority, it isn’t biblical.

According to the Scriptures, all three members of the Trinity are fully God:

God the Father—Jesus Christ referred to His Father as God (John 5:17-18).

God the SonJohn 1:1 identifies Jesus as divine. While Christ never specifically called Himself “God,” His Father did apply the title to Him (Heb. 1:8). Furthermore, Jesus acknowledged having unlimited power—an attribute possessed only by the divine Creator (Matthew 28:18)—and also accepted worship (Matthew 14:33; John 9:38).

God the Holy Spirit—After declaring that God raised Christ from the dead, the New Testament goes on to credit the Holy Spirit with the resurrection (Romans 8:11). Jesus reinforced that idea when He commanded the disciples to baptize new believers in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The Bible confirms that each member of the Trinity is equally God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit function as a unit—no one is more important or less essential than the others. All three are focused upon their plan for mankind: salvation, transformation, and glory for God.

-InTouch Ministries-

Keith posted:

God in Three Persons

Matthew 28:18-20

Years ago, after I preached about God’s Spirit, a woman came up after church to complain, “Why do you talk about the Holy Spirit when people need to hear about Jesus and God?” Sometimes even those who have been Christians for a long time regard the Trinity as a hierarchy. To their way of thinking, the Father is God, Jesus is slightly beneath Him in rank and seniority, and the Holy Spirit is their servant. While this may conform to human models of authority, it isn’t biblical.

According to the Scriptures, all three members of the Trinity are fully God:

God the Father—Jesus Christ referred to His Father as God (John 5:17-18).

God the SonJohn 1:1 identifies Jesus as divine. While Christ never specifically called Himself “God,” His Father did apply the title to Him (Heb. 1:8). Furthermore, Jesus acknowledged having unlimited power—an attribute possessed only by the divine Creator (Matthew 28:18)—and also accepted worship (Matthew 14:33; John 9:38).

God the Holy Spirit—After declaring that God raised Christ from the dead, the New Testament goes on to credit the Holy Spirit with the resurrection (Romans 8:11). Jesus reinforced that idea when He commanded the disciples to baptize new believers in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The Bible confirms that each member of the Trinity is equally God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit function as a unit—no one is more important or less essential than the others. All three are focused upon their plan for mankind: salvation, transformation, and glory for God.

-InTouch Ministries-

So you must believe in Hinduism too. If you don't, please don't give me the idol worship garbage to support your argument.

skeldon_man posted:
Keith posted:

God in Three Persons

Matthew 28:18-20

Years ago, after I preached about God’s Spirit, a woman came up after church to complain, “Why do you talk about the Holy Spirit when people need to hear about Jesus and God?” Sometimes even those who have been Christians for a long time regard the Trinity as a hierarchy. To their way of thinking, the Father is God, Jesus is slightly beneath Him in rank and seniority, and the Holy Spirit is their servant. While this may conform to human models of authority, it isn’t biblical.

According to the Scriptures, all three members of the Trinity are fully God:

God the Father—Jesus Christ referred to His Father as God (John 5:17-18).

God the SonJohn 1:1 identifies Jesus as divine. While Christ never specifically called Himself “God,” His Father did apply the title to Him (Heb. 1:8). Furthermore, Jesus acknowledged having unlimited power—an attribute possessed only by the divine Creator (Matthew 28:18)—and also accepted worship (Matthew 14:33; John 9:38).

God the Holy Spirit—After declaring that God raised Christ from the dead, the New Testament goes on to credit the Holy Spirit with the resurrection (Romans 8:11). Jesus reinforced that idea when He commanded the disciples to baptize new believers in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The Bible confirms that each member of the Trinity is equally God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit function as a unit—no one is more important or less essential than the others. All three are focused upon their plan for mankind: salvation, transformation, and glory for God.

-InTouch Ministries-

So you must believe in Hinduism too. If you don't, please don't give me the idol worship garbage to support your argument.

Yet the hypocritical thing is Christians demean Hindus. They should heed that 'speck in eyes advice'.

Keith posted:

God in Three Persons

Matthew 28:18-20

Years ago, after I preached about God’s Spirit, a woman came up after church to complain, “Why do you talk about the Holy Spirit when people need to hear about Jesus and God?” Sometimes even those who have been Christians for a long time regard the Trinity as a hierarchy. To their way of thinking, the Father is God, Jesus is slightly beneath Him in rank and seniority, and the Holy Spirit is their servant. While this may conform to human models of authority, it isn’t biblical.

According to the Scriptures, all three members of the Trinity are fully God:

God the Father—Jesus Christ referred to His Father as God (John 5:17-18).

God the SonJohn 1:1 identifies Jesus as divine. While Christ never specifically called Himself “God,” His Father did apply the title to Him (Heb. 1:8). Furthermore, Jesus acknowledged having unlimited power—an attribute possessed only by the divine Creator (Matthew 28:18)—and also accepted worship (Matthew 14:33; John 9:38).

God the Holy Spirit—After declaring that God raised Christ from the dead, the New Testament goes on to credit the Holy Spirit with the resurrection (Romans 8:11). Jesus reinforced that idea when He commanded the disciples to baptize new believers in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The Bible confirms that each member of the Trinity is equally God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit function as a unit—no one is more important or less essential than the others. All three are focused upon their plan for mankind: salvation, transformation, and glory for God.

-InTouch Ministries-

Regarding the last paragraph above, Jesus himself said that "My father is greater than I. My father is greater than all". Either he was lying or the paragraph above is.

Yet you think you can read and comprehend.

Reading and comprehending is not what you do brother Keith. What you really do is follow blindly like cattle. The Jews were smart people. They had no patience for Jesus' nonsense, antics and shenanigans and that is why they opposed him. They were not time wasters like he was just goofing off with his compadres.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

God in Three Persons

Matthew 28:18-20

Years ago, after I preached about God’s Spirit, a woman came up after church to complain, “Why do you talk about the Holy Spirit when people need to hear about Jesus and God?” Sometimes even those who have been Christians for a long time regard the Trinity as a hierarchy. To their way of thinking, the Father is God, Jesus is slightly beneath Him in rank and seniority, and the Holy Spirit is their servant. While this may conform to human models of authority, it isn’t biblical.

According to the Scriptures, all three members of the Trinity are fully God:

God the Father—Jesus Christ referred to His Father as God (John 5:17-18).

God the SonJohn 1:1 identifies Jesus as divine. While Christ never specifically called Himself “God,” His Father did apply the title to Him (Heb. 1:8). Furthermore, Jesus acknowledged having unlimited power—an attribute possessed only by the divine Creator (Matthew 28:18)—and also accepted worship (Matthew 14:33; John 9:38).

God the Holy Spirit—After declaring that God raised Christ from the dead, the New Testament goes on to credit the Holy Spirit with the resurrection (Romans 8:11). Jesus reinforced that idea when He commanded the disciples to baptize new believers in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.


Hm, let see, oh here is the last Paragraph ksazma is referring too:
The Bible confirms that each member of the Trinity is equally God. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit function as a unit—no one is more important or less essential than the others. All three are focused upon their plan for mankind: salvation, transformation, and glory for God.

-InTouch Ministries-

Regarding the last paragraph above, Jesus himself said that "My father is greater than I. My father is greater than all". Either he was lying or the paragraph above is.

Yet you think you can read and comprehend.

Here is why I said you (ksazma) are making a spectacle of yourself. As pointed out above in RED, I took the liberty of marking where the last paragraph is so we can clearly see, it either you who is lying. I failed to see what you are mentioning here ksazma, is it just me or someone else sees what he is talking about here in the last paragraph. ksazma you are proving everyday how incompetent you are.  

I would also like ksazma to point out where, as he quoted, "My father is greater than I. My father is greater than all" is located in the post above and where in the bible he can find it and present it to us in plain view.

Folks I can guarantee you that we will have a case of misquoting and the ability of comprehending by ksazma.

Keith, do you understand what 'greater' means? Maybe that word means something different in the Bible than everywhere else? Guess you didn't expect to encounter someone who knows so much about the Bible. You didn't expect to run into a buzz saw.

The Bible states that no one can see God's face and live. In other words if you see God you will die. So just so Moses wouldn't die when he wanted to see God, turned so all Moses saw was God's backside. Think of that for a moment. If Jesus was God, how come they didn't die like how God went to great lengths to ensure that Moses only saw his backside.

Like Jesus said when the man addressed him as Good, he told him don't call me good because the only one good is God.

ksazma posted:

Keith, do you understand what 'greater' means? Maybe that word means something different in the Bible than everywhere else? Guess you didn't expect to encounter someone who knows so much about the Bible. You didn't expect to run into a buzz saw.

Do you know what a last paragraph is? Certainly not

I asked that you point out where, as you quoted, "My father is greater than I. My father is greater than all" is located in the bible and present it to us in plain view.

Yet you failed again to present your supportive argument. Just stop, you are looking foolish by the minute.

ksazma posted:

The Bible states that no one can see God's face and live. In other words if you see God you will die. So just so Moses wouldn't die when he wanted to see God, turned so all Moses saw was God's backside. Think of that for a moment. If Jesus was God, how come they didn't die like how God went to great lengths to ensure that Moses only saw his backside.

Like Jesus said when the man addressed him as Good, he told him don't call me good because the only one good is God.

I'll allow you to drown in your foolishness. Your incompetence is unbearable.

ksazma posted:

You really think too much of yourself Keith. I don't need you to allow me to do anything. You speak very pompously yet you base all your positions on blind faith instead of logic.

What happen?  I asked that you point out where, as you quoted, "My father is greater than I. My father is greater than all" is located in the bible. Did it get lost in translation?

You are a joke.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

You really think too much of yourself Keith. I don't need you to allow me to do anything. You speak very pompously yet you base all your positions on blind faith instead of logic.

What happen?  I asked that you point out where, as you quoted, "My father is greater than I. My father is greater than all" is located in the bible. Did it get lost in translation?

You are a joke.

So you can't find it yourself? And then what after I post it? You people need to read your Bible rather than just read what your preachers write or say.

ksazma posted:

Now go read John 14:27-31. KJV.

Thanks for posting it now if I can get you to do this simple thing. Where is the contradiction you speak about that I am yet to see.
You see that was not hard to post.

Do you understand John 14:27-31?

Question: "If Jesus was God, why did He say "The Father is greater than I" in John 14:28?"

The phrase "the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28) was spoken by Jesus. Jesus says repeatedly that He is doing the Father’s will, thereby implying that He is somehow subservient to the Father. The question then becomes how can Jesus be equal to God when by His own admission He is subservient to the will of God? The answer to this question lies within the nature of the incarnation (born of a virgin, you know the story). During the incarnation, Jesus was temporarily "made lower than the angels" you will find that in Hebrews 2:9, which refers to Jesus’ status.

Therefore, the fact that the Son took on a human nature and made Himself subservient to the Father in no way denies the deity of the Son, nor does it diminish His essential equality with the Father. The "greatness" spoken of in this verse, then, relates to role, not to essence.

I will stop here before you mind blow ksazma. I don't what to get too lengthy as you put it. It's a discussion not a sermon.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

You really think too much of yourself Keith. I don't need you to allow me to do anything. You speak very pompously yet you base all your positions on blind faith instead of logic.

What happen?  I asked that you point out where, as you quoted, "My father is greater than I. My father is greater than all" is located in the bible. Did it get lost in translation?

You are a joke.

So you can't find it yourself? And then what after I post it? You people need to read your Bible rather than just read what your preachers write or say.

You need to do exactly what you suggesting me to do which I do on a daily basis, READ the Bible.

ksazma posted:

For your clarification I did not provide John because you asked me to. I did so because I chose to. I do only what I wish. That said, your explanation of John 14:28 is senseless. 

Whatever you say, I commend your effort

I didn't expect anything else other than for you to disagree with my statement, it's your moto to always show disappointment even if truth/facts slaps you in the face. 

Could you go the extra mile and tell me how long it take God to create heaven and earth according to the Quran? I need to know if you been reading that book as you should. 

So "during the incarnation, Jesus was temporarily "made lower than the angels" and up to John 14 which was near his end he still claiming that his father is greater than he. So when was he and his father equal. Like I said, either Jesus was lying or you are (you being Christians).

Seeing Christ in Our Circumstances

Philippians 1:12-25

If you had the power to change your circumstances, would you? Since no one has a life without problems, most of us would immediately say yes. However, the reality is that we must learn to live with some of our difficult circumstances, because only God has the power to alter them—and in His providence, He’s allowed them to remain.

Take the apostle Paul, for example. He had a desire to go to Rome and preach the gospel but didn’t anticipate the route God would use to bring him there. It began with false accusations in Jerusalem, an appeal to Caesar, a rough sea voyage, and a shipwreck and eventually included time spent in a Roman prison. This was probably not what Paul had envisioned, but as he sat chained to a Roman guard, he wrote the following words to the church in Philippi: “My circumstances have turned out for the greater progress of the gospel” (Phil. 1:12). The very circumstance that may have seemed like an unfair misfortune became the avenue for fruitful service.

What looks like a shipwreck or detour in our plans could actually be God’s ordained path for our lives. It may include financial challenges, health issues, relational conflicts, or any number of other hardships, but there is one certainty to which we can cling: Jesus Christ is our life, and He never changes.

Conditions around us will fluctuate, but if we belong to Christ, He’ll use every situation to accomplish His will in and through us. Even when we face matters of life and death, we can share Paul’s desire—that Christ would be exalted in us, whether through life or death.

ksazma posted:

So "during the incarnation, Jesus was temporarily "made lower than the angels" and up to John 14 which was near his end he still claiming that his father is greater than he. So when was he and his father equal. Like I said, either Jesus was lying or you are (you being Christians).

Keep reading until you reach the end of revelations

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

So "during the incarnation, Jesus was temporarily "made lower than the angels" and up to John 14 which was near his end he still claiming that his father is greater than he. So when was he and his father equal. Like I said, either Jesus was lying or you are (you being Christians).

Keep reading until you reach the end of revelations

Not able to recognize rhetorical questions eh?

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

So "during the incarnation, Jesus was temporarily "made lower than the angels" and up to John 14 which was near his end he still claiming that his father is greater than he. So when was he and his father equal. Like I said, either Jesus was lying or you are (you being Christians).

Keep reading until you reach the end of revelations

Not able to recognize rhetorical questions eh?

Your inept of comprehending/recollect is shameful. Once again, I am not address your questions.

I am waiting  to hear how long it take God to create heaven and earth according to the Quran? Answer that and then we can continue to a discussion. What's holding you up from answering it?

ksazma posted:

 

Keep fooling yourself dude. Also be careful what you wish for.

Do you want us to continue having a discussion or not? If yes just answer my question, it's that simple.

How long it take God to create heaven and earth according to the Quran? just provide your answer and stop 'beating around the bush' per say.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

 

Keep fooling yourself dude. Also be careful what you wish for.

Do you want us to continue having a discussion or not? If yes just answer my question, it's that simple.

How long it take God to create heaven and earth according to the Quran? just provide your answer and stop 'beating around the bush' per say.

I have told you before that the only thing I intend to do is respond to what you post about the Bible. I didn't start anything about any other book or faiths and I don't intend to. You came here preaching your stuff and while nothing is wrong with that, once you acted like only what you preach is of value, you opened yourself to objections. I am not foolish to start pontificating anything because in doing so I would be forced by nature to elevate my pontification above others. You may be comfortable with that attitude but I don't care to be. So keep fooling yourself.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

 

Keep fooling yourself dude. Also be careful what you wish for.

Do you want us to continue having a discussion or not? If yes just answer my question, it's that simple.

How long it take God to create heaven and earth according to the Quran? just provide your answer and stop 'beating around the bush' per say.

I have told you before that the only thing I intend to do is respond to what you post about the Bible. I didn't start anything about any other book or faiths and I don't intend to. You came here preaching your stuff and while nothing is wrong with that, once you acted like only what you preach is of value, you opened yourself to objections. I am not foolish to start pontificating anything because in doing so I would be forced by nature to elevate my pontification above others. You may be comfortable with that attitude but I don't care to be. So keep fooling yourself.

You made some false statements, such as contradiction, I corrected your false notions. Now since you failed to take the speck out of your own eyes before trying to discredit the Bible. I am simply asking you a question and you running from giving us(being the viewers) an answer. 

Keith posted:

You made some false statements, such as contradiction, I corrected your false notions. Now since you failed to take the speck out of your own eyes before trying to discredit the Bible. I am simply asking you a question and you running from giving us(being the viewers) an answer. 

I didn't make any false statements. Was there any passage that I post and claimed was from the Bible NOT from the Bible? Do you understand what false mean?

Learning Contentment

Philippians 4:10-13

We usually associate contentment with good conditions. When our family relationships are great, work is fulfilling, and we have no health or financial problems, then we feel at ease. But if something goes wrong, our satisfaction vanishes.

That’s not what today’s passage is talking about. Paul had learned to be content no matter what his conditions were. This is wonderful news for us because it means we aren’t at the mercy of our circumstances; we, too, can learn to be content regardless of what we’re facing. We should remember:

Paul was content because he rested in God’s faithfulness. He knew the Lord was in full control (Psalm 103:19) and promised to work all things for His children’s good (Romans 8:28). In any and every circumstance, Paul rested in the security of God’s sovereign, loving hand. The apostle also trusted that whatever he needed would be provided in the Lord’s time.

His contentment also flowed from a focus on Christ. Although he was writing from a Roman prison, Paul wasn’t feeling like a victim or wallowing in self-pity. Throughout the letter to the Philippians, he talked about Jesus. In fact, his greatest pursuit in life was to know Christ, His power, and the fellowship of His sufferings (Romans 3:10). No circumstance could hinder that pursuit. On the contrary, every situation—even when painful or difficult—was an opportunity to know Christ more intimately.

We’ll never be able to find lasting contentment in our circumstances, but we can find it in Christ. When we surrender our life to Him, our situation may not change, but we will. No matter what we face, we can be content.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

You made some false statements, such as contradiction, I corrected your false notions. Now since you failed to take the speck out of your own eyes before trying to discredit the Bible. I am simply asking you a question and you running from giving us(being the viewers) an answer. 

I didn't make any false statements. Was there any passage that I post and claimed was from the Bible NOT from the Bible? Do you understand what false mean?

Certainly not but you made false statement in reference to Paul and Jesus there are a few others, just go back and read your past post you will see the clear definition of false statement my brother.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

You made some false statements, such as contradiction, I corrected your false notions. Now since you failed to take the speck out of your own eyes before trying to discredit the Bible. I am simply asking you a question and you running from giving us(being the viewers) an answer. 

I didn't make any false statements. Was there any passage that I post and claimed was from the Bible NOT from the Bible? Do you understand what false mean?

Certainly not but you made false statement in reference to Paul and Jesus there are a few others, just go back and read your past post you will see the clear definition of false statement my brother.

That is not called false statements my friend. That is my conclusion of who they are. We are all free to have our own conclusions. You have yours and all I did was presented an varying one. I am not telling you to change yours at all. We are all entitled to our opinions.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

You made some false statements, such as contradiction, I corrected your false notions. Now since you failed to take the speck out of your own eyes before trying to discredit the Bible. I am simply asking you a question and you running from giving us(being the viewers) an answer. 

I didn't make any false statements. Was there any passage that I post and claimed was from the Bible NOT from the Bible? Do you understand what false mean?

Certainly not but you made false statement in reference to Paul and Jesus there are a few others, just go back and read your past post you will see the clear definition of false statement my brother.

That is not called false statements my friend. That is my conclusion of who they are. We are all free to have our own conclusions. You have yours and all I did was presented an varying one. I am not telling you to change yours at all. We are all entitled to our opinions.

Ksaz, like I told Keith, the bible has deeper meaning than what Christians believe. These dudes like zombies swallow the writings like hook, line and sinker. They read but do not analyze and comprehend. That's the reason the followers are so shallow. Bible colleges are the easiest to obtain a diploma. All they need to do is to recite the passages word for word.

skeldon_man posted:
 

Ksaz, like I told Keith, the bible has deeper meaning than what Christians believe. These dudes like zombies swallow the writings like hook, line and sinker. They read but do not analyze and comprehend. That's the reason the followers are so shallow. Bible colleges are the easiest to obtain a diploma. All they need to do is to recite the passages word for word.

Skelly, it is just interested that they are always criticizing other peoples' beliefs when there is nothing so special or better about theirs. My sole objective was to demonstrate that to Keith.

ksazma posted:
skeldon_man posted:
 

Ksaz, like I told Keith, the bible has deeper meaning than what Christians believe. These dudes like zombies swallow the writings like hook, line and sinker. They read but do not analyze and comprehend. That's the reason the followers are so shallow. Bible colleges are the easiest to obtain a diploma. All they need to do is to recite the passages word for word.

Skelly, it is just interested that they are always criticizing other peoples' beliefs when there is nothing so special or better about theirs. My sole objective was to demonstrate that to Keith.

You are such a hypocrite. Before you open your mouth or put your hands on a keyboard to type check yourself brother. Again you failed to take that speck out of your own eyes and now you throwing stones at a glass building. I need you to find where I, I'm not talking about other people, criticized your belief. When you finish count the number of criticisms I've been attack here with due to my belief.

As for your apprentice no need to respond to that misguided fellow, his own folly will drown him.

Let's watch "Finding Jesus" on Fake News Channel(CNN) on March 5th. We should be able to accept the truth and the dissenting commentaries. Hope we keep an open mind. I think(maybe) I have seen this on America Heroes Channel before. I'll still watch it again.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
skeldon_man posted:
 

Ksaz, like I told Keith, the bible has deeper meaning than what Christians believe. These dudes like zombies swallow the writings like hook, line and sinker. They read but do not analyze and comprehend. That's the reason the followers are so shallow. Bible colleges are the easiest to obtain a diploma. All they need to do is to recite the passages word for word.

Skelly, it is just interested that they are always criticizing other peoples' beliefs when there is nothing so special or better about theirs. My sole objective was to demonstrate that to Keith.

You are such a hypocrite. Before you open your mouth or put your hands on a keyboard to type check yourself brother. Again you failed to take that speck out of your own eyes and now you throwing stones at a glass building. I need you to find where I, I'm not talking about other people, criticized your belief. When you finish count the number of criticisms I've been attack here with due to my belief.

As for your apprentice no need to respond to that misguided fellow, his own folly will drown him.

Lets see where I entered this topic. You began it on October 16th 2016 and it was not until your post on December 15, 2016, that I offered my opinion on THAT post. Two months of uninterrupted activity on any message board is a lifetime. Below in my post from that day. Your post crossed the line from Christian belief to global reprimand of anyone who does not accept Jesus the way you did. My response was to show why I don't care to see Jesus as you do and I proceeded to highlight his record from the Bible to support my argument. There is not one reference that I made from the Bible that you can say I manufactured. You may disagree with my conclusions but you cannot say that I said the Bible state something that it didn't.

Secondly, why are you asking about if you ever criticized any other person's belief? Are you hoping to by asking me about the Qur'an? I prefer to keep this on the topic you chose instead of expanding it to other topics. If I begin a topic to pontificate about the Qur'an for instance, you would be more than welcome to make your objections. I haven't done so nor do I care to at this time but you can still hope that I do some day.

And there you go again calling Skelly a misguided person who will drown in his own folly. And how do you know that he isn't the guided one and the rest of us including you and I aren't the misguided ones? See how easy it is for you to fall into that ditch you think is for someone else?

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Keith posted:

Jesus Christ Is Lord

Romans 14:7-12

Followers of Jesus would agree that whether we live or die, we do so for Christ. But His sovereignty is not limited to those who claim Him as King. The entire world—the whole universe, in fact—is subject to His authority. At the final judgment, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess and praise God.

In the here and now, relatively few people recognize the Lord’s rule and seek to remain in His will. Most refuse to see that all of our human constructs—such as government, culture, and society—thrive or falter in the palm of God’s hand. Moreover, nonbelievers resist Christ’s sovereignty in their own lives. People who won’t surrender their will to the Lord’s great purpose assume control of their own destiny. However, the Lord’s supreme reign cannot be thwarted.

It’s common for men and women today to believe that there are no consequences for rejecting the lordship of Jesus Christ. You may have heard people say things like, “That Christian stuff works for you, but it’s not for me. I’ll live on my own terms.” Yet Jesus’ parable of houses built on either solid rock or sand offers a different perspective (Matt. 7:24-27). Only those who make their abode in the Lord can withstand the upheavals of this world.

Kneeling before Jesus Christ as the Lord of your life is the wisest decision you can make. The sovereign Ruler of the universe loves you and desires to bless all of your days. Make your eternal home in the safety of His kingdom, and forever delight in Him.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ksazma posted:

Suppose that all of this is just make believe? Suppose that what people say of Jesus and what he actually was are two completely different realities? No doubt believers of Jesus will point to what others wrote of Jesus to support their belief. However, if one realistically take the very limited events, words and actions of Jesus as documented in the New Testament free from blind faith, one will come to a different conclusion.

To begin with, Jesus was no king. He was born to an unmarried woman in a barn and does not even know his father. He grew up in the working class with barely any measurable accomplishments. He hanged out with a bunch of other guys who made him feel important but he was not even acknowledged as a leader of the church and had no meaningful role in the church of his peers.

But that was not all. He was also rude, obnoxious and prejudiced as shown in the manner of how he referred to people who were not Jewish of or his inner circle. Names like dogs, pigs, swine, wicked and adulterous people to name a few. He constantly whined about the comforts that others had while he had nothing of his own. If you weren't Jewish, you were not worthy of his acknowledgement. He was even rude and disrespectful to his own mother who bore him through pregnancy and childbirth regardless of her getting pregnant and not disclosing who got her pregnant.

Now this all may sound harsh but they will make sense once one is willing and able to remove the blinders of faith for no matter how much lipstick one put on a pig, it is still a pig. And if Jesus had no problem calling others pigs, none should be concerned that I use the pig reference here.

I asked a simple question and what I got a display of your incompetence to answer. Where did I discredited/critized your beliefs?

I did asked a question about the Quran, hm I don't see that as a criticism but since you raised that issue then again I ask:

"How many days did it take God to create the heaven and earth according to the Quran, the book you ksazma believe in"? 

I awate your answer, not surprising you will come up with excuse about being careful for what you ask for. Just answer the question. Don't you want to see if my response would be critical or not? 

Keith posted:

I asked a simple question and what I got a display of your incompetence to answer. Where did I discredited/critized your beliefs?

I did asked a question about the Quran, hm I don't see that as a criticism but since you raised that issue then again I ask,

How man days did it take God to create the heaven and earth according to the Quran, the book you ksazma believe in? 

I awate your answer, not surprising you will come up with excuse about being careful for what you ask for. Just answer the question. Don't you want to see if my response would be critical or not? 

Keep fooling yourself that it is incompetence. You really think that I am afraid to speak about the Qur'an? I am not interested in comparing the contents of Bible to that of the Qur'an because then I would by nature have to elevate the Qur'an which I refuse to do because it will go against my objection of you elevating your Christian belief above other beliefs. I am no rookie dude.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

I asked a simple question and what I got a display of your incompetence to answer. Where did I discredited/critized your beliefs?

I did asked a question about the Quran, hm I don't see that as a criticism but since you raised that issue then again I ask,

How man days did it take God to create the heaven and earth according to the Quran, the book you ksazma believe in? 

I awate your answer, not surprising you will come up with excuse about being careful for what you ask for. Just answer the question. Don't you want to see if my response would be critical or not? 

Keep fooling yourself that it is incompetence. You really think that I am afraid to speak about the Qur'an? I am not interested in comparing the contents of Bible to that of the Qur'an because then I would by nature have to elevate the Qur'an which I refuse to do because it will go against my objection of you elevating your Christian belief above other beliefs. I am no rookie dude.

Ksaz, bettah teech dis brudda Keith how fuh spell "AWAIT". Same thing I said about "dem bible skool pickney".

skeldon_man posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

I asked a simple question and what I got a display of your incompetence to answer. Where did I discredited/critized your beliefs?

I did asked a question about the Quran, hm I don't see that as a criticism but since you raised that issue then again I ask,

How man days did it take God to create the heaven and earth according to the Quran, the book you ksazma believe in? 

I awate your answer, not surprising you will come up with excuse about being careful for what you ask for. Just answer the question. Don't you want to see if my response would be critical or not? 

Keep fooling yourself that it is incompetence. You really think that I am afraid to speak about the Qur'an? I am not interested in comparing the contents of Bible to that of the Qur'an because then I would by nature have to elevate the Qur'an which I refuse to do because it will go against my objection of you elevating your Christian belief above other beliefs. I am no rookie dude.

Ksaz, bettah teech dis brudda Keith how fuh spell "AWAIT". Same thing I said about "dem bible skool pickney".

Thanks for the correction much appreciated

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

I asked a simple question and what I got a display of your incompetence to answer. Where did I discredited/critized your beliefs?

I did asked a question about the Quran, hm I don't see that as a criticism but since you raised that issue then again I ask,

How man days did it take God to create the heaven and earth according to the Quran, the book you ksazma believe in? 

I awate your answer, not surprising you will come up with excuse about being careful for what you ask for. Just answer the question. Don't you want to see if my response would be critical or not? 

Keep fooling yourself that it is incompetence. You really think that I am afraid to speak about the Qur'an? I am not interested in comparing the contents of Bible to that of the Qur'an because then I would by nature have to elevate the Qur'an which I refuse to do because it will go against my objection of you elevating your Christian belief above other beliefs. I am no rookie dude.

Another excuse, like I said not a bit surprise. Elevate all you want and keep running from the question.

Still waiting to see where I criticize your beliefs.

Keith posted:
 

Another excuse, like I said not a bit surprise. Elevate all you want and keep running from the question.

Still waiting to see where I criticize your beliefs.

I said other peoples' beliefs, not mine. Now go back and look for them.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
 

Another excuse, like I said not a bit surprise. Elevate all you want and keep running from the question.

Still waiting to see where I criticize your beliefs.

I said other peoples' beliefs, not mine. Now go back and look for them.

In that case where did I criticize other people beliefs on this forum? 

Keith posted:

In that case where did I criticize other people beliefs on this forum? 

It is embed in your many posts. Granted you are cutting and pasting these from someone else so they are not yours per say but when you decide to post them, you take on that person's or organization's burden. Your posts speak of your Christian way being the only way which is insulting to other peoples' beliefs. My objective was to demonstrate that there is nothing special with your way which I did very competently.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

In that case where did I criticize other people beliefs on this forum? 

It is embed in your many posts. Granted you are cutting and pasting these from someone else so they are not yours per say but when you decide to post them, you take on that person's or organization's burden. Your posts speak of your Christian way being the only way which is insulting to other peoples' beliefs. My objective was to demonstrate that there is nothing special with your way which I did very competently.

I said show me, I didn't asked for your analysis. And yes those post that I do during the week comes from "In touch ministry" and there noting in there that criticize another person beliefs. 

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

In that case where did I criticize other people beliefs on this forum? 

It is embed in your many posts. Granted you are cutting and pasting these from someone else so they are not yours per say but when you decide to post them, you take on that person's or organization's burden. Your posts speak of your Christian way being the only way which is insulting to other peoples' beliefs. My objective was to demonstrate that there is nothing special with your way which I did very competently.

I said show me, I didn't asked for your analysis. And yes those post that I do during the week comes from "In touch ministry" and there noting in there that criticize another person beliefs. 

You don't have to ask fro someone's input when you post on a public domain. It is part of the deal of participating of a public domain. You are always free to have your own private domain where you can post anything you wish. I am not here to do your work for you. I participate whenever I care to and to the extent that I do. I am not going back to show you anything. You can do that is you wish. I have moved on to your next post whenever you post it and if I care to get involved in it.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

In that case where did I criticize other people beliefs on this forum? 

It is embed in your many posts. Granted you are cutting and pasting these from someone else so they are not yours per say but when you decide to post them, you take on that person's or organization's burden. Your posts speak of your Christian way being the only way which is insulting to other peoples' beliefs. My objective was to demonstrate that there is nothing special with your way which I did very competently.

I said show me, I didn't asked for your analysis. And yes those post that I do during the week comes from "In touch ministry" and there nothing in there that criticize another person beliefs. 

You don't have to ask fro someone's input when you post on a public domain. It is part of the deal of participating of a public domain. You are always free to have your own private domain where you can post anything you wish. I am not here to do your work for you. I participate whenever I care to and to the extent that I do. I am not going back to show you anything. You can do that is you wish. I have moved on to your next post whenever you post it and if I care to get involved in it.

You're failing to understand, it's you who accused me of criticizing others beliefs here, I'm certain I've not therefore the burden is on you to present proof that I did what you are accusing me of. Is that too hard to understand?

The Foundation of Wisdom

Proverbs 9:7-12

“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Prov. 9:10). Initially, the connection between these two concepts may be difficult to grasp. How can fearing God make us wise?

First, we need to understand what it means to fear the Lord. This term is used to describe an awesome reverence for God that moves us to acknowledge Him as the sovereign ruler of heaven and earth, submit to His will, and walk in obedience. The result of such a response will be the acquisition of wisdom.

If we commit ourselves to living for God’s purposes rather than our own, we will gain greater understanding of Him. The Holy Spirit will enable us to see circumstances and people from His divine perspective. This kind of wisdom reaches beyond human perception and gives us discernment to make decisions that fit into the Lord’s plans for our life. Knowing that He always works for our best interests, we are empowered to walk confidently through both good and bad times.

But if we reject God’s instructions, we dishonor Him with our refusal to acknowledge His right to rule our life. It’s foolish to rebel against His authority and think we can ever win. Those who won’t fear God will never know real wisdom.

What is your attitude toward the Lord? If you truly revere Him, you will listen for His directions and heed His warnings. A desire to honor and please Him will motivate you to turn from evil and seek to live in obedience. The result will be wisdom beyond human understanding.

-In Touch Ministries-

Funny that Keith says that I am incompetent when that description better suits him. Take for example, I stated that at no time in Abraham's life was Isaac his only son. Keith disagreed with that statement. So how am I the incompetent one?

ksazma posted:

Funny that Keith says that I am incompetent when that description better suits him. Take for example, I stated that at no time in Abraham's life was Isaac his only son. Keith disagreed with that statement. So how am I the incompetent one?

I really don't have to say it when you are displaying your incompetence everyday.

I'm still waiting for you to present me with the evidence of what you were accusing me of.

You decided to change the subject by bringing up matters that were dealt and laid to rest. You are trying hard to escape your incompetence and your ignorance to comprehend is appalling.

Question: How many sons were in Abraham presence when God speak to him saying, "take thy ONLY son"....I think when reality kicks in you will get it.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Funny that Keith says that I am incompetent when that description better suits him. Take for example, I stated that at no time in Abraham's life was Isaac his only son. Keith disagreed with that statement. So how am I the incompetent one?

I really don't have to say it when you are displaying your incompetence everyday.

I'm still waiting for you to present me with the evidence of what you were accusing me of.

You decided to change the subject by bringing up matters that were dealt and laid to rest. You are trying hard to escape your incompetence and your ignorance to comprehend is appalling.

Question: How many sons were in Abraham presence when God speak to him saying, "take thy ONLY son"....I think when reality kicks in you will get it.

Dude, all the arguments that I have made on this topic are much more logical than what the church teaches so I could have picked any.

But you do realize that your question highlighted above makes your God look ever sillier? Wonder if you ever tell any of your kids that whenever they are not in the same room as you, they are not your child?

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Funny that Keith says that I am incompetent when that description better suits him. Take for example, I stated that at no time in Abraham's life was Isaac his only son. Keith disagreed with that statement. So how am I the incompetent one?

I really don't have to say it when you are displaying your incompetence everyday.

I'm still waiting for you to present me with the evidence of what you were accusing me of.

You decided to change the subject by bringing up matters that were dealt and laid to rest. You are trying hard to escape your incompetence and your ignorance to comprehend is appalling.

Question: How many sons were in Abraham presence when God speak to him saying, "take thy ONLY son"....I think when reality kicks in you will get it.

Dude, all the arguments that I have made on this topic are much more logical than what the church teaches so I could have picked any.

But you do realize that your question highlighted above makes your God look ever sillier? Wonder if you ever tell any of your kids that whenever they are not in the same room as you, they are not your child?

Are you going to answer the question or skip it like all others? Just another simple question, that's all. 

You know the story so tell us was Ishmael present when God told Abraham, "take thy only son"? You did notice I break it down to a kid level of understanding for you because I didn't want to insult your intelligence, oh, I did, didn't I. Forgive me it was not intentional

Walking Wisely

Ephesians 5:15-17

When Paul exhorts us to walk wisely, he gives three instructions to help us make godly choices. First, he says to “be careful how you walk” (Eph. 5:15). Because we live in a morally corrupt society, we must be vigilant about the way we think and act. Unless we deliberately choose to guard ourselves, we will simply do what comes naturally and go along with cultural influences.

Next, in verse 16, the apostle instructs us to make the most of our time. The Lord has entrusted each of us with 24 hours per day and various opportunities to participate in His plans for us. But so often we are tempted to squander our time and energy on our own pursuits without a thought of what our heavenly Father may have in mind for us.

In verse 17, Paul lays out the final exhortation: to “understand what the will of the Lord is” (Eph. 5:17) In its broadest sense, God’s will for us is that we would each become the person that He created us to be and do the work He has planned for us to accomplish (Eph. 2:10). Knowing this, we should look at every decision with consideration of whether our choice will further or hinder our heavenly Father’s purposes for our life. To live thoughtlessly outside of His will is foolish.

The Lord wants us to walk wisely so that we can enjoy all of the marvelous benefits that He’s promised in His Word and longs to give us. Wasted opportunities and time misspent can never be reclaimed. Let’s commit to make each and every day count for Jesus Christ instead of merely living for ourselves.

Keith posted:

So the new question I am asking of ksazma to tell us is:

Was Ishmael there in Abraham presence when God instructed him to, "take thy only son"? 

Folks as you can see it's a simple yes/no answer I need from my friend ksazma. 

That's a stupid question dude. I am surprised you are taking so much pride in asking it. People don't stop being someone's child just because they live in a different place. Ishmael was still alive when Isaac was born and even when Isaac was around the age when Abraham tried to sacrifice his ONLY son. The only time Abraham had an ONLY son was before Isaac was born.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

So the new question I am asking of ksazma to tell us is:

Was Ishmael there in Abraham presence when God instructed him to, "take thy only son"? 

Folks as you can see it's a simple yes/no answer I need from my friend ksazma. 

That's a stupid question dude. I am surprised you are taking so much pride in asking it. People don't stop being someone's child just because they live in a different place. Ishmael was still alive when Isaac was born and even when Isaac was around the age when Abraham tried to sacrifice his ONLY son. The only time Abraham had an ONLY son was before Isaac was born.

Are you really listening to yourself when you are typing/speaking? As /I said your ignorance is appalling. I didn't say Ishmael was not Abraham child nor have I ever denied it.

What I'm asking you is simple. So far we have establish that Abraham had two sons, Ishmael the older son, Hagar being his mother and Isaac the younger son, Sarai being his mother, do you understand so far? Then we read Sarai had Abraham sent away her handmaid Hagar and son, do you recall that, did they leave or stayed? So if we were to take a census after Hagar and Ishmael departure we would find only Abraham, Sarai and their son Isaac.

Now I'm asking the question again, when God spoke to Abraham, "take thy only son", Where was Ishmael and Hagar? Were they currently present in Abraham household when God spoke to Abraham.

This very simple reasoning is displaying vacuous on your part. Keep it up and you will end up in a straight jacket, those white ones. 

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

So the new question I am asking of ksazma to tell us is:

Was Ishmael there in Abraham presence when God instructed him to, "take thy only son"? 

Folks as you can see it's a simple yes/no answer I need from my friend ksazma. 

That's a stupid question dude. I am surprised you are taking so much pride in asking it. People don't stop being someone's child just because they live in a different place. Ishmael was still alive when Isaac was born and even when Isaac was around the age when Abraham tried to sacrifice his ONLY son. The only time Abraham had an ONLY son was before Isaac was born.

Are you really listening to yourself when you are typing/speaking? As /I said your ignorance is appalling. I didn't say Ishmael was not Abraham child nor have I ever denied it.

What I'm asking you is simple. So far we have establish that Abraham had two sons, Ishmael the older son, Hagar being his mother and Isaac the younger son, Sarai being his mother, do you understand so far? Then we read Sarai had Abraham sent away her handmaid Hagar and son, do you recall that, did they leave or stayed? So if we were to take a census after Hagar and Ishmael departure we would find only Abraham, Sarai and their son Isaac.

Now I'm asking the question again, when God spoke to Abraham, "take thy only son", Where was Ishmael and Hagar? Were they currently present in Abraham household when God spoke to Abraham.

This very simple reasoning is displaying vacuous on your part. Keep it up and might end up in a straight jacket, those white ones. 

Nothing has changed from my last post. Your question is still stupid. At no time was Isaac Abraham's ONLY son. Only Ishmael was Abraham's ONLY son before Isaac was born. I don't play stupid games answering stupid questions. Keep that stupidness for when you are in your church.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

So the new question I am asking of ksazma to tell us is:

Was Ishmael there in Abraham presence when God instructed him to, "take thy only son"? 

Folks as you can see it's a simple yes/no answer I need from my friend ksazma. 

That's a stupid question dude. I am surprised you are taking so much pride in asking it. People don't stop being someone's child just because they live in a different place. Ishmael was still alive when Isaac was born and even when Isaac was around the age when Abraham tried to sacrifice his ONLY son. The only time Abraham had an ONLY son was before Isaac was born.

Are you really listening to yourself when you are typing/speaking? As /I said your ignorance is appalling. I didn't say Ishmael was not Abraham child nor have I ever denied it.

What I'm asking you is simple. So far we have establish that Abraham had two sons, Ishmael the older son, Hagar being his mother and Isaac the younger son, Sarai being his mother, do you understand so far? Then we read Sarai had Abraham sent away her handmaid Hagar and son, do you recall that, did they leave or stayed? So if we were to take a census after Hagar and Ishmael departure we would find only Abraham, Sarai and their son Isaac.

Now I'm asking the question again, when God spoke to Abraham, "take thy only son", Where was Ishmael and Hagar? Were they currently present in Abraham household when God spoke to Abraham.

This very simple reasoning is displaying vacuous on your part. Keep it up and might end up in a straight jacket, those white ones. 

Nothing has changed from my last post. Your question is still stupid. At no time was Isaac Abraham's ONLY son. Only Ishmael was Abraham's ONLY son before Isaac was born. I don't play stupid games answering stupid questions. Keep that stupidness for when you are in your church.

Am I disputing the Abraham is Isaac only son? NO! Ishmael never cease from being his son. What I am asking you is to tell us the viewers, was Ishmael with Abraham when God spoke to him saying, "...taking thy only son.." Man, some folks need you to beat reasoning into their head.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Keep up all your snide remarks also. But then again your hero Jesus was just like that with all his rotten attitude and stupidness.

I am only pointing out the obvious

It is never necessary to point out the obvious.

Keith posted:

Am I disputing the Abraham is Isaac only son? NO! Ishmael never cease from being his son. 

Good. You finally catch sense that your book or your God is confused to state that Isaac was Abraham's ONLY son at the time of the 'sacrifice'.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

Am I disputing the Abraham is Isaac only son? NO! Ishmael never cease from being his son. 

Good. You finally catch sense that your book or your God is confused to state that Isaac was Abraham's ONLY son at the time of the 'sacrifice'.

I think if you are to really pay attention to that book that you believe in and read you will see how many suspense it leaves you in. Case in point, did that book ever reveal to you the name of the person who was being sacrifice by Abraham or it left you to assume?

Anyway, back to your assumptions, what the heck are you talking about by stating, "finally catch sense that your book or your God is confused to state that Isaac was Abraham's ONLY son at the time of the 'sacrifice'". You are one misguided individual and lack a whole lot of understanding.

Are you accusing me now of stating that Abraham only had one son?  If so I challenge you again to show where I said that. All I am asking, was Ishmael there when God spoke to Abraham about the sacrifice? We can getting into the  sacrifice issue once you answer my simple yes/no question.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

Am I disputing the Abraham is Isaac only son? NO! Ishmael never cease from being his son. 

Good. You finally catch sense that your book or your God is confused to state that Isaac was Abraham's ONLY son at the time of the 'sacrifice'.

I think if you are to really pay attention to that book that you believe in and read you will see how many suspense it leaves you in. Case in point, did that book ever reveal to you the name of the person who was being sacrifice by Abraham or it left you to assume?

Anyway, back to your assumptions, what the heck are you talking about by stating, "finally catch sense that your book or your God is confused to state that Isaac was Abraham's ONLY son at the time of the 'sacrifice'". You are one misguided individual and lack a whole lot of understanding.

Are you accusing me now of stating that Abraham only had one son?  If so I challenge you again to show where I said that. All I am asking, was Ishmael there when God spoke to Abraham about the sacrifice? We can getting into the  sacrifice issue once you answer my simple yes/no question.

God never told Abraham to sacrifice anyone. Your book is misguided to think that God would ask one of his creature to kill his child. However, at the time that Abraham was going to sacrifice ISHMAEL, Isaac was not even conceived and therefore not in existence. Therefore when Abraham had only ONE child that child was Ishmael.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

Am I disputing the Abraham is Isaac only son? NO! Ishmael never cease from being his son. 

Good. You finally catch sense that your book or your God is confused to state that Isaac was Abraham's ONLY son at the time of the 'sacrifice'.

I think if you are to really pay attention to that book that you believe in and read you will see how many suspense it leaves you in. Case in point, did that book ever reveal to you the name of the person who was being sacrifice by Abraham or it left you to assume?

Anyway, back to your assumptions, what the heck are you talking about by stating, "finally catch sense that your book or your God is confused to state that Isaac was Abraham's ONLY son at the time of the 'sacrifice'". You are one misguided individual and lack a whole lot of understanding.

Are you accusing me now of stating that Abraham only had one son?  If so I challenge you again to show where I said that. All I am asking, was Ishmael there when God spoke to Abraham about the sacrifice? We can getting into the  sacrifice issue once you answer my simple yes/no question.

God never told Abraham to sacrifice anyone. Your book is misguided to think that God would ask one of his creature to kill his child. However, at the time that Abraham was going to sacrifice ISHMAEL, Isaac was not even conceived and therefore not in existence. Therefore when Abraham had only ONE child that child was Ishmael.

I will address your misunderstanding later for now go read and be ready

You are in no position to do so as you stand on shaky ground. What kind of God asks a 99 years old man to slit the throat of his 13 years old son who he didn't have until he was in his 86th year? That would be nothing less than a very confused God.

God’s Word to Us

2 Timothy 4:1-5

Most everyone in our society has easy access to a Bible, yet far too often this book is left unopened. If only people grasped its true worth, they would prize God’s Word above every other possession.

All of Scripture was inspired by the Holy Spirit. While He used man to pen each line, every thought and word in the Bible originated with God Himself (2 Peter 1:20-21).

Consider how we treasure letters from people we love. Our response to Scripture should be even stronger. The Creator of the universe—the God who holds eternity in His hand—recorded all the truth that is necessary for His children to live fully and joyfully, both before and after death (2 Peter 1:3). God reveals Himself through His Word, which is alive and so powerful that it can transform our lives (Heb. 4:12).

What’s more, Romans 10:17 explains the great importance of our love for the Bible: “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.” Scripture, then, is the very means by which saving faith is possible.

How could such a book become so commonplace in our heart? So taken for granted? It is vital that we realize the preeminence of its author—and Scripture’s potential impact on our life today.

Think about the last time you saw a Bible. What was your reaction? Did you finger the pages with awe, or did you pass it by with barely a glance? Next time you open this precious book, read the words, savor their meaning, and ask God to help you apply its lessons to your life

ksazma posted:

You are in no position to do so as you stand on shaky ground. What kind of God asks a 99 years old man to slit the throat of his 13 years old son who he didn't have until he was in his 86th year? That would be nothing less than a very confused God.

Looks like voodooism in Haiti.

Skelly, in the old days people used to believe lots of things and to give those beliefs credence they will claim that God ordained them. Our responsibility is to recognize those things as not from God because it makes God look like a sadist.

ksazma, perhaps you failed to understand the Bible and Quran, Abraham had obeyed God many times in his walk with Him, but no test could have been more severe than the one in Genesis 22. God commanded, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering" (Genesis 22:2). I understand that the Quran didn't say who was being sacrifice, we will get to that later to clear up your misunderstand.

Since this idea steam from ksazma misunderstanding of the phrase "only son", it becomes necessary to explain what this phrase exactly means in relation to Isaac. A careful reading of the Bible shows that the phrase is used to affirm Isaac's unique status, a status based on the following,

1 - Isaac was the promised child of Abraham, a fact which the Quran agrees with Genesis 17:15-21; Surah 11:69-73, 37:112-113, 51:24-30), pay attention to Surah 11:71 .

2 -  Isaac was conceived miraculously to a barren mother and a very aged father, the Quran likewise agreeing with Genesis 17:15-17, 18:9-15, 21:1-7; Galatians 4:28-29; Surah 11:69-73, 51:24-30

3 - In Genesis 13:14-18, 15:18-21, 28:13-14 God promised that it would be Isaac's descendants who would inherit the land given to Abraham. Ishmael had no part in the inheritance and promise given to Isaac through Abraham.

It is for these reasons that Isaac is called Abraham's only son since God himself reckoned him as the child of promise and blessings, an honor never bestowed upon Ishmael.

Even more startling is the fact that the Quran never mentions the name of the sacrificial child; amazing indeed considering how ksazma overzealous stated, as I quote him, "...at the time that Abraham was going to sacrifice ISHMAEL, Isaac was not even conceived..."

Lets read Surah 37:99-106: "And [then] he said, "Indeed, I will go to [where I am ordered by] my Lord; He will guide me. My Lord, grant me [a child] from among the righteous." So We gave him good tidings of a forbearing boy.

"And when he reached with him [the age of] exertion, he said, "O my son, indeed I have seen in a dream that I [must] sacrifice you, so see what you think." He said, "O my father, do as you are commanded. You will find me, if Allah wills, of the steadfast."’

"And when they had both submitted and he put him down upon his forehead, we called out to him, ‘O Abraham! You have fulfilled the vision." Indeed, We thus reward the doers of good Indeed, this was the clear trial" (Surah 37:99-106).

Hmm, ksazma quote, "God never told Abraham to sacrifice anyone", you should read Surah 11:71 again.

I recall an Islamic historian by the of Al-Tabari, do you know him ksazma? he said, and I quote, "The earliest sages of our Prophet's nation disagree about which of Abraham's two sons it was that he was commanded to sacrifice. Some say it was Isaac, while others say it was Ishmael. Both views are supported by statements related on the authority of the Messenger of God. If both groups of statements were equally sound, then - since they both came from the Prophet only the Quran could serve as proof that the account naming Isaac is clearly the more truthful of the two."

Once again ksazma prove how incompetent he's, even the book he believe in he don't understand, ksazma didn't even know where God was requiring a sacrifice of Abraham. ksazma said, "God never told Abraham to sacrifice anyone".  I understand your unfortunate situation, it's a book that skips around and failed to stay on point and leave you with a whole lot of guess work.

The ground under your feet might be sinking, I hope you verify your resident was not built on a sink hole .....look like you are sinking and drowning in your incompetence faster that I expected.

Nobody is discussing any other book. This is about the book you presented, the Bible. When you see me state on this topic that I follow the Qur'an, then you can expand the scope to include it. The only book you are pontificating is the Bible and I respond strictly to what you post on the Bible. And I repeat, at no time in Abraham's life was Isaac his ONLY son. Also only a sadistic God would ask a 99 years old man to kill his 13 years old child when he did not have that child until he was 86.

ksazma posted:

Nobody is discussing any other book. This is about the book you presented, the Bible. When you see me state on this topic that I follow the Qur'an, then you can expand the scope to include it. The only book you are pontificating is the Bible and I respond strictly to what you post on the Bible. And I repeat, at no time in Abraham's life was Isaac his ONLY son. Also only a sadistic God would ask a 99 years old man to kill his 13 years old child when he did not have that child until he was 86.

And I repeat again, at NO time did I say Abraham only son was Isaac. All books are fair play, I quote the Bible and the Quran to present my factual statements.

I need you to tell us whether Ishmael was present when God spoke to Abraham saying, "...take thy only son.." I await. YES/NO!.....lets see how ksazma avoid this question again

Maybe you didn't say that Isaac was Abraham's only son. What I initially stated was that when your Bible stated that Isaac was Abraham's only son, either the writer was confused or God was.  All books can't be fair play when all books weren't introduced. You began with the Bible and so far only you are desperately seeking to add other books. Deal with the one you started with. I have no interest in going beyond that.

ksazma posted:

Maybe you didn't say that Isaac was Abraham's only son. What I initially stated was that when your Bible stated that Isaac was Abraham's only son, either the writer was confused or God was.  All books can't be fair play when all books weren't introduced. You began with the Bible and so far only you is desparately seeking to add other books. Deal with the one you started with. I have no interest in going beyond that.

Here answer your own questions, was Ishmael present when God spoke to Abraham saying, "...take thy only son..". YES/NO!?

Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. 

Any book that can back up my factual statement I will used, grow up dude.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Maybe you didn't say that Isaac was Abraham's only son. What I initially stated was that when your Bible stated that Isaac was Abraham's only son, either the writer was confused or God was.  All books can't be fair play when all books weren't introduced. You began with the Bible and so far only you is desparately seeking to add other books. Deal with the one you started with. I have no interest in going beyond that.

Here answer your own questions, was Ishmael present when God spoke to Abraham saying, "...take thy only son..". YES/NO!?

Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. 

Any book that can back up my factual statement I will used, grow up dude.

I have responded to your question many times but for some strange reason you think it is a smart question. In fact it is a stupid question. Once again. A person does not cease being someone's child if they are not in the same room. If you believe they do and if your God share that opinion, then that God is highly confused.

The Value of God’s Word

2 Timothy 3:14-17

From the opening verse of Genesis to the final words of Revelation, Scripture is divinely inspired; every word has purpose. In today’s passage, we are told that the sacred writings are “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be ... equipped for every good work.” In other words, they offer preparation for whatever we will face in life (2 Tim. 3:16-17). No other book holds such value for living.

The Old Testament introduces us to God’s nature, ways, and power; it lays the foundation for us to understand the Lord’s holiness and humanity’s desperate need for a Savior. The New Testament explains that Jesus sacrificially became our “bridge” to the Father (John 14:6). Its writings clarify why we must trust Christ for salvation, how to live as God’s children, and what to expect in this life and after death.

Ephesians 6:13-17 compares the Word to armor, and for good reason: In the battle of life, we have a real enemy who wants to destroy us. But God’s power is greater (1 John 4:4), and dressing in war gear prepares us for the temptations, lies, and decisions we will encounter daily.

We should be excited about the Word of God, for it is our hope—and the only instruction that leads to victory, in life and after physical death.

The Bible predicted that many people would reject the truth, and a glimpse at our world today shows that to be the case. Don’t let yourself fall into the same trap. Life without His truth is destined for failure, so meditate daily on Scripture, and ask God to speak to you.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Maybe you didn't say that Isaac was Abraham's only son. What I initially stated was that when your Bible stated that Isaac was Abraham's only son, either the writer was confused or God was.  All books can't be fair play when all books weren't introduced. You began with the Bible and so far only you is desparately seeking to add other books. Deal with the one you started with. I have no interest in going beyond that.

Here answer your own questions, was Ishmael present when God spoke to Abraham saying, "...take thy only son..". YES/NO!?

Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. 

Any book that can back up my factual statement I will used, grow up dude.

I have responded to your question many times but for some strange reason you think it is a smart question. In fact it is a stupid question. Once again. A person does not cease being someone's child if they are not in the same room. If you believe they do and if your God share that opinion, then that God is highly confused.

What you have done is to eluded question, simple Yes/No would suffice.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Maybe you didn't say that Isaac was Abraham's only son. What I initially stated was that when your Bible stated that Isaac was Abraham's only son, either the writer was confused or God was.  All books can't be fair play when all books weren't introduced. You began with the Bible and so far only you is desparately seeking to add other books. Deal with the one you started with. I have no interest in going beyond that.

Here answer your own questions, was Ishmael present when God spoke to Abraham saying, "...take thy only son..". YES/NO!?

Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. 

Any book that can back up my factual statement I will used, grow up dude.

I have responded to your question many times but for some strange reason you think it is a smart question. In fact it is a stupid question. Once again. A person does not cease being someone's child if they are not in the same room. If you believe they do and if your God share that opinion, then that God is highly confused.

What you have done is to eluded question, simple Yes/No would suffice.

Do you know the meaning of elude? Your question is stupid and your premise is flawed. Isaac was NEVER Abraham's ONLY son. For the God of the Bible to utter those words shows how confused that God is or how confused the writers were. 

ksazma posted:

By the way, does the Bible state that Ishmael ceases to be Abraham's child just because they are not in the same place? So how can Isaac be Abraham's ONLY son at the time that stupid command was given to Abraham?

ksazma neither the Bible nor I ever stated what you are trying to imply above. What you are having problem with is the ability to comprehend. Both book, the bible & Quran mention that Hagar and Ishmael was left in desert/wilderness, after that(I'm not implying immediately) God then spoke to Abraham.

Follow me here, let me simplify this you. You have two sons, one went off to college in South Pole and the other stayed home with you. A man approach you in your house and said, "you should take your son fishing", who would he be referring too? Would it be the one miles away or the one in eye sight / hand reach?

What's bothering the folks like yourself is the phrase "Only Son", which can simply imply the only one left in your camp/tent take him.

But then again, lets look at the scripture:

Genesis 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.

Did you notice God was distinct about whom he was referring too? That verse/scripture did not left us hanging in suspense and confusion.  

ksazma posted:

Back to your most recent post about all scriptures being inspired by God. Why then do the non-Catholic Christians reject seven books in the Catholic Bible?

You are a predictable person, as I quoted in a few post back:

"Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. " 

Answer my question Yes/No then we can entertain a new subject.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Maybe you didn't say that Isaac was Abraham's only son. What I initially stated was that when your Bible stated that Isaac was Abraham's only son, either the writer was confused or God was.  All books can't be fair play when all books weren't introduced. You began with the Bible and so far only you is desparately seeking to add other books. Deal with the one you started with. I have no interest in going beyond that.

Here answer your own questions, was Ishmael present when God spoke to Abraham saying, "...take thy only son..". YES/NO!?

Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. 

Any book that can back up my factual statement I will used, grow up dude.

I have responded to your question many times but for some strange reason you think it is a smart question. In fact it is a stupid question. Once again. A person does not cease being someone's child if they are not in the same room. If you believe they do and if your God share that opinion, then that God is highly confused.

What you have done is to eluded question, simple Yes/No would suffice.

Do you know the meaning of elude? Your question is stupid and your premise is flawed. Isaac was NEVER Abraham's ONLY son. For the God of the Bible to utter those words shows how confused that God is or how confused the writers were. 

Read the above post it's pointed out  clearly for you. You seem kinda grumpy this morning. Is everything Ok, you had your breakfast?

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Back to your most recent post about all scriptures being inspired by God. Why then do the non-Catholic Christians reject seven books in the Catholic Bible?

You are a predictable person, as I quoted in a few post back:

"Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. " 

Answer my question Yes/No then we can entertain a new subject.

So you think it's despicable of someone to run from answering a question? That's real funny shit!

Can you, Keith, give straight answers to my questions?

antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Back to your most recent post about all scriptures being inspired by God. Why then do the non-Catholic Christians reject seven books in the Catholic Bible?

You are a predictable person, as I quoted in a few post back:

"Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. " 

Answer my question Yes/No then we can entertain a new subject.

So you think it's despicable of someone to run from answering a question? That's real funny shit!

Can you, Keith, give straight answers to my questions?

No need, it will not be answering anything coming from you,  it's not worth my time, go talk with your friends Steven Hawkins and others. I do have few questions that your group of friends will not be able to answer. Therefore stay in your corner until your number is called.

Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Back to your most recent post about all scriptures being inspired by God. Why then do the non-Catholic Christians reject seven books in the Catholic Bible?

You are a predictable person, as I quoted in a few post back:

"Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. " 

Answer my question Yes/No then we can entertain a new subject.

So you think it's despicable of someone to run from answering a question? That's real funny shit!

Can you, Keith, give straight answers to my questions?

No need, it will not be answering anything coming from you,  it's not worth my time, go talk with your friends Steven Hawkins and others. I do have few questions that your group of friends will not be able to answer. Therefore stay in your corner until your number is called.

Fear!! Stark fear!

Shouldn't your beliefs provide you with courage? My questions have nothing to do with science - they are very simple, straight forward, and uncomplicated. They merely seek clarification of your own statements.

antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Back to your most recent post about all scriptures being inspired by God. Why then do the non-Catholic Christians reject seven books in the Catholic Bible?

You are a predictable person, as I quoted in a few post back:

"Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. " 

Answer my question Yes/No then we can entertain a new subject.

So you think it's despicable of someone to run from answering a question? That's real funny shit!

Can you, Keith, give straight answers to my questions?

No need, it will not be answering anything coming from you,  it's not worth my time, go talk with your friends Steven Hawkins and others. I do have few questions that your group of friends will not be able to answer. Therefore stay in your corner until your number is called.

Fear!! Stark fear!

Shouldn't your beliefs provide you with courage? My questions have nothing to do with science - they are very simple, straight forward, and uncomplicated. They merely seek clarification of your own statements.

I fear no man. I entertained you before and it was mundane I have no interest in spinning that record again.

ksazma posted:

Let's reset. In that Biblical passage, when God addressed Abraham about Isaac, did He say "your only son, Isaac"?

I posted the scripture above for you to read and see, look through the previous post and you will see what it say.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Let's reset. In that Biblical passage, when God addressed Abraham about Isaac, did He say "your only son, Isaac"?

I posted the scripture above for you to read and see, look through the previous post and you will see what it say.

I have read the scriptures many times and my conclusion is that God was confused to refer to Isaac as Abraham's ONLY son. It is right there in black and white.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Let's reset. In that Biblical passage, when God addressed Abraham about Isaac, did He say "your only son, Isaac"?

I posted the scripture above for you to read and see, look through the previous post and you will see what it say.

I have read the scriptures many times and my conclusion is that God was confused to refer to Isaac as Abraham's ONLY son. It is right there in black and white.

It's you who's confuse, have you read what I posted in its entirety? As I stated before, that phrase don't literally mean Abraham bore one child only. It's speaking about the one child was currently in Abraham presence at that particular time. Lets say Ishmael was dead no longer with Abraham, could we use the same statement, "Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac" and would it have been a issue?

Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Back to your most recent post about all scriptures being inspired by God. Why then do the non-Catholic Christians reject seven books in the Catholic Bible?

You are a predictable person, as I quoted in a few post back:

"Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. " 

Answer my question Yes/No then we can entertain a new subject.

So you think it's despicable of someone to run from answering a question? That's real funny shit!

Can you, Keith, give straight answers to my questions?

No need, it will not be answering anything coming from you,  it's not worth my time, go talk with your friends Steven Hawkins and others. I do have few questions that your group of friends will not be able to answer. Therefore stay in your corner until your number is called.

Fear!! Stark fear!

Shouldn't your beliefs provide you with courage? My questions have nothing to do with science - they are very simple, straight forward, and uncomplicated. They merely seek clarification of your own statements.

I fear no man. I entertained you before and it was mundane I have no interest in spinning that record again.

Right. Our exchange had to be mundane because I cannot recall it but I'm guessing you did not fare too well ... hence the fear.

Are you ignoring your sworn duty to enlighten me?

Is your son still missing or did he also succumb to the fear?

antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Back to your most recent post about all scriptures being inspired by God. Why then do the non-Catholic Christians reject seven books in the Catholic Bible?

You are a predictable person, as I quoted in a few post back:

"Why you running from answering the question? But what can we expect from you never a straight answer or start another subject. " 

Answer my question Yes/No then we can entertain a new subject.

So you think it's despicable of someone to run from answering a question? That's real funny shit!

Can you, Keith, give straight answers to my questions?

No need, it will not be answering anything coming from you,  it's not worth my time, go talk with your friends Steven Hawkins and others. I do have few questions that your group of friends will not be able to answer. Therefore stay in your corner until your number is called.

Fear!! Stark fear!

Shouldn't your beliefs provide you with courage? My questions have nothing to do with science - they are very simple, straight forward, and uncomplicated. They merely seek clarification of your own statements.

I fear no man. I entertained you before and it was mundane I have no interest in spinning that record again.

Right. Our exchange had to be mundane because I cannot recall it but I'm guessing you did not fare too well ... hence the fear.

Are you ignoring your sworn duty to enlighten me?

Is your son still missing or did he also succumb to the fear?

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Let's reset. In that Biblical passage, when God addressed Abraham about Isaac, did He say "your only son, Isaac"?

I posted the scripture above for you to read and see, look through the previous post and you will see what it say.

I have read the scriptures many times and my conclusion is that God was confused to refer to Isaac as Abraham's ONLY son. It is right there in black and white.

It's you who's confuse, have you read what I posted in its entirety? As I stated before, that phrase don't literally mean Abraham bore one child only. It's speaking about the one child was currently in Abraham presence at that particular time. Lets say Ishmael was dead no longer with Abraham, could we use the same statement, "Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac" and would it have been a issue?

Nothing you posted can remove the fact that the passage erroneously suggested that Isaac was at that particular time Abraham's ONLY son. You can chase your tail how many different ways you feel necessary but none of those will alter the erroneous statement in the Bible. Enough about beating this dead horse. You lost that argument resoundingly. Now for the other matter you posted yesterday.

In your sermon yesterday, you mentioned that "All scriptures are inspired by God". As you may know, the Catholic Version Bible has 73 books while the non-Catholic versions have only 66 books. This is because the non-Catholic Christians reject seven of the books included in the Roman Catholic Bible. If all scriptures are inspired by God, why do non-Catholic Christians reject seven of God's inspired books?

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Let's reset. In that Biblical passage, when God addressed Abraham about Isaac, did He say "your only son, Isaac"?

I posted the scripture above for you to read and see, look through the previous post and you will see what it say.

I have read the scriptures many times and my conclusion is that God was confused to refer to Isaac as Abraham's ONLY son. It is right there in black and white.

It's you who's confuse, have you read what I posted in its entirety? As I stated before, that phrase don't literally mean Abraham bore one child only. It's speaking about the one child was currently in Abraham presence at that particular time. Lets say Ishmael was dead no longer with Abraham, could we use the same statement, "Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac" and would it have been a issue?

Nothing you posted can remove the fact that the passage erroneously suggested that Isaac was at that particular time Abraham's ONLY son. You can chase your tail how many different ways you feel necessary but none of those will alter the erroneous statement in the Bible. Enough about beating this dead horse. You lost that argument resoundingly. Now for the other matter you posted yesterday.

No sense reasoning with one who lacks understanding. You are the one that lost this argument with failures to answer simple questions therefore as you suggest no need to batter you brains any longer. It's your nature to deflect and dodge. 

ksazma posted:

In your sermon yesterday, you mentioned that "All scriptures are inspired by God". As you may know, the Catholic Version Bible has 73 books while the non-Catholic versions have only 66 books. This is because the non-Catholic Christians reject seven of the books included in the Roman Catholic Bible. If all scriptures are inspired by God, why do non-Catholic Christians reject seven of God's inspired books?

Look dude, I cannot answer for Catholic, Mormon, Jews, Baptist, Seven Days Adventist etc. You find those folks and let them address your questions. 

I grew up with the infallible words of God containing 66 books, capable of standing up on its own against any other books.

Could you answer for what your radical   believers do?  

ksazma you failed to address my questions and our discussion end here, I forewarned you of this. 

Go have a conversation with your buddy anta you both understand each other better with your level of reasoning. 

Just for the record, anyone who destroys lives and property like those radicals (as you referred to as MY radical believers) do isn't part of the human race.

Since your infallible word of God has 66 books, is the Catholic Bible compromised. How do you know that you are reading the whole book? Is this because you grew up being taught that?

skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I will definitely watch it.

Facing Our Fears

Psalm 91:1-16

Fear creeps into our life and wraps itself around our mind and heart. This can happen so subtly that we don’t recognize how anxiety has affected our decision making, our health, and our spirit. Ultimately, many people miss God’s best because apprehension keeps them from stepping out in faith to do His will.

The fear may seem unimportant at first, but left unchecked, it begins to interfere with our life. Physically, we may experience tension that keeps us from relaxing and enjoying the day’s pleasures. Anxiety can lead to health problems, especially if it is constant. Mentally, our mind may be clouded by fear, which can limit what we are willing to think about and consider. If that should happen, our dreams and creativity will almost certainly be stifled.

But the mental paralysis that often accompanies unchecked fear is most dangerous to our spiritual life. Unless it is entrusted to God, a single fear can easily rule over us, coloring our attitude with a general sense of disquiet. We become indecisive, worried that we will make the wrong choice. So we are trapped, trying to avoid anything that might make us anxious. Consequently, we stop growing as Christians and are usually hindered in our work and family life, too.

If you allow yourself to be paralyzed by worry, you cannot be placing complete trust in God and following Him wholeheartedly. Make an honest assessment of your life, and ask the Lord to reveal places where fear is holding you back.

ksazma posted:

Just for the record, anyone who destroys lives and property like those radicals (as you referred to as MY radical believers) do isn't part of the human race.

Since your infallible word of God has 66 books, is the Catholic Bible compromised. How do you know that you are reading the whole book? Is this because you grew up being taught that?

Where was Ishmael when God spoke to Abraham, 'take thy son'?

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

Just for the record, anyone who destroys lives and property like those radicals (as you referred to as MY radical believers) do isn't part of the human race.

Since your infallible word of God has 66 books, is the Catholic Bible compromised. How do you know that you are reading the whole book? Is this because you grew up being taught that?

Where was Ishmael when God spoke to Abraham, 'take thy son'?

First of all, God never told Abraham to slit his son's throat. However, the incident you refer to involved Abraham and Ishmael. Isaac was not born yet. Your Bible is wrong with its account as it is with many more.

skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

CNN is possessed by satanic forces. That is why The Great Trump will crush them. Sometimes, the wicked does God's bidding, unkowingly. Bcz the righteous is too good to concieve unrighteous thoughts. 

seignet posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

CNN is possessed by satanic forces. That is why The Great Trump will crush them. Sometimes, the wicked does God's bidding, unkowingly. Bcz the righteous is too good to concieve unrighteous thoughts. 

CNN owner is a part of the Stephen Hawkins crew. Like I said before I was not aware Jesus was lost. Next we will hear John the Baptist was lost too.

seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Thanks for sharing brother.

Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Interesting given that only Christian preachers ask people if they found Jesus yet. 

seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Stay tuned and keep an open mind. Didn't his disciples steal his body and claimed that he was ascended into heaven? Or was that the UFO and it's crew that Ezekiel saw? Could it be that Jesus was sent to us by an advanced civilization? Who knows brother Keith?

antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Run Mr Keith, Run!

antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Run Mr Keith, Run!

No running from me, your not worth my time nothing constructive come from you go talk to Turner and Hawkins and let me know if you come up with an answer to:

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

skeldon_man posted:
Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Stay tuned and keep an open mind. Didn't his disciples steal his body and claimed that he was ascended into heaven? Or was that the UFO and it's crew that Ezekiel saw? Could it be that Jesus was sent to us by an advanced civilization? Who knows brother Keith?

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:
Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Stay tuned and keep an open mind. Didn't his disciples steal his body and claimed that he was ascended into heaven? Or was that the UFO and it's crew that Ezekiel saw? Could it be that Jesus was sent to us by an advanced civilization? Who knows brother Keith?

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Not so long ago you claimed that the Bible has all the answers. What happened.

Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Run Mr Keith, Run!

No running from me, your not worth my time nothing constructive come from you go talk to Turner and Hawkins and let me know if you come up with an answer to:

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

I always thought that religious fanatics could overcome any fear with their faith. Are you too fake to respond to my questions? Are you afraid the answers will show the defects in your beliefs?

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:
Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Stay tuned and keep an open mind. Didn't his disciples steal his body and claimed that he was ascended into heaven? Or was that the UFO and it's crew that Ezekiel saw? Could it be that Jesus was sent to us by an advanced civilization? Who knows brother Keith?

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Not so long ago you claimed that the Bible has all the answers. What happened.

It does nothing have changed. If you would like to entertain your partner  question go right ahead. I don't have time for foolishness maybe you do. 

antabanta posted:

I think this man Keith is nuff mouth - he gone and hide from me again and hoping that Seignet will answer on his behalf.

But I will answer you, tonight. After I talked to God. I will converse with Him. His wisdom is infinite. And the Angels are out, full force in the Third Hour with dreams and prophecies. At 3.00 am I will answer you. I hope the Angels mek yuh dream about yuh queries.   

However, whatever I say will never be acceptable by you. I know so.

But, I will interject my two bit. So nah fuh waste meh time, I asking that the Divine consult wid yuh in the dreams. Dat way, meh answers could clear the air, 

antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Run Mr Keith, Run!

No running from me, your not worth my time nothing constructive come from you go talk to Turner and Hawkins and let me know if you come up with an answer to:

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

I always thought that religious fanatics could overcome any fear with their faith. Are you too fake to respond to my questions? Are you afraid the answers will show the defects in your beliefs?

Your characterization of me is fallacious. You failed to realize that you lack substance therefore I don't intend to waste time on you or anyone else with your nonsensical questions.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
 

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Not so long ago you claimed that the Bible has all the answers. What happened.

It does nothing have changed. If you would like to entertain your partner  question go right ahead. I don't have time for foolishness maybe you do. 

Are you aware that the King James Version of the Bible was revised in 1952 and then again in 1971 and on both of those occasions large portions were thrown out and put back with some completely being left out of unceremoniously moved to the footnotes and out of the text? Are you aware that many Biblical scholars don't support the resurrection as an actual event? Now that Paul has stated that if Christ hasn't resurrected, then Christians' faith is in vain. How does that work in light of the ancient documents not supporting the resurrection?

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
 

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Not so long ago you claimed that the Bible has all the answers. What happened.

It does nothing have changed. If you would like to entertain your partner  question go right ahead. I don't have time for foolishness maybe you do. 

Are you aware that the King James Version of the Bible was revised in 1952 and then again in 1971 and on both of those occasions large portions were thrown out and put back with some completely being left out of unceremoniously moved to the footnotes and out of the text? Are you aware that many Biblical scholars don't support the resurrection as an actual event? Now that Paul has stated that if Christ hasn't resurrected, then Christians' faith is in vain. How does that work in light of the ancient documents not supporting the resurrection?

Don't talk about things you have no understanding of. Focus on the book you believe in. I warned you about throwing brick at glass building and taking the speck out of your eyes first. 

It's pathetic to see the level you have stooped to now. Be careful. 

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
 

Are you aware that the King James Version of the Bible was revised in 1952 and then again in 1971 and on both of those occasions large portions were thrown out and put back with some completely being left out of unceremoniously moved to the footnotes and out of the text? Are you aware that many Biblical scholars don't support the resurrection as an actual event? Now that Paul has stated that if Christ hasn't resurrected, then Christians' faith is in vain. How does that work in light of the ancient documents not supporting the resurrection?

Don't talk about things you have no understanding of. Focus on the book you believe in. I warned you about throwing brick at glass building and taking the speck out of your eyes first. 

It's pathetic to see the level you have stooped to now. Be careful. 

Which part of what I wrote above demonstrate a lack of understanding of what I wrote? You seem to be trying desperately to find a place to hide by seeking to bring up others books. Shows how unprepared you were to handle the proliferation of your faith. And I wouldn't even bother to point out how much I have managed to tamper with your persona, attitude and behavior. You once said something about the devil and I. Looks like the devil has taken over your soul. Thought you were so deeply grounded in your faith in Jesus to avoid becoming the victim you have become. But don't despair. You are not the only one. Religious people usually end up like you did because they put their trust in people/gods that are powerless.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
 

Are you aware that the King James Version of the Bible was revised in 1952 and then again in 1971 and on both of those occasions large portions were thrown out and put back with some completely being left out of unceremoniously moved to the footnotes and out of the text? Are you aware that many Biblical scholars don't support the resurrection as an actual event? Now that Paul has stated that if Christ hasn't resurrected, then Christians' faith is in vain. How does that work in light of the ancient documents not supporting the resurrection?

Don't talk about things you have no understanding of. Focus on the book you believe in. I warned you about throwing brick at glass building and taking the speck out of your eyes first. 

It's pathetic to see the level you have stooped to now. Be careful. 

Which part of what I wrote above demonstrate a lack of understanding of what I wrote? You seem to be trying desperately to find a place to hide by seeking to bring up others books. Shows how unprepared you were to handle the proliferation of your faith. And I wouldn't even bother to point out how much I have managed to tamper with your persona, attitude and behavior. You once said something about the devil and I. Looks like the devil has taken over your soul. Thought you were so deeply grounded in your faith in Jesus to avoid becoming the victim you have become. But don't despair. You are not the only one. Religious people usually end up like you did because they put their trust in people/gods that are powerless.

Are you that shallow, I am aware of your incompetence but why display it everyday. You graduated from contradiction to the rewritten and omission of chapters/scriptures from the Bible. 

What weakness you have shown here time after time by deflect and dodging questions and raising new question to side track the audience. 

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear; I just need a Yes/no answer then we can jump to your other topic/questions so I can point out more of your incompetence.

Have a great weekend. 

PS: I never call you a devil, your actions are of his nature but I never put that label on you. You care to prove otherwise?

Keith posted:
 

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son.

Then the Bible was erroneous to state that God told Abraham to take his ONLY son, Isaac. Either God was confused or the writer was. So who really was the writer of that mistake? Moses, Ezra or ........... 

Your nonsense about whether Ishmael was present in Abraham's sight does not justify a response except to demonstrate how nonsensical it is. At no time in Abraham's life was Isaac ever Abraham's ONLY son.

Bible scholars speak about interpolation in the Bible. They say that it is matter NOT in the manuscripts that were ADDED to the Bible. Bible apologists seek some refuge in claiming that they are only added to clarify the text. The mere fact that words are added to the text is a demonstration of the text not being wholesome anymore because normal readers of the Bible can't differentiate what is interpolation and what is not. The word Isaac in the passage in question is an interpolation as it is not necessary for God to identify Abraham's ONLY son as there is no other son to differentiate him from. You can swallow whatever you wish as you are free to believe whatever you wish. That is your right. I have my rights also.

You pull anyone off the street and tell them that Abraham's first son Ishmael was born when Abraham was 86 years old and his second son was born when he was 99 years old and ask them when would Abraham has only one son and everyone you ask will say, 'between 86 and 99 years old when he had only Ishmael. That is logical. The mumbo jumbo that you learn from that ministry can't match that logic with any other argument especially the one about if someone is in a person's sight.

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

Keith posted:

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

What audience are you thinking about. Do you really think people come here for your sermon?

Regarding your "here is what I started above" bit, which part of my "Your nonsense about whether Ishmael was present in Abraham's sight does not justify a response except to demonstrate how nonsensical it is" didn't you understand?

About coherence, observe that I write MOSTLY in my own words while you MOSTLY cut and paste other peoples' materials so you are in no position to assess another person's writings.

Keith posted:

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

Abraham had many concubines and he had children with all of them. Whether he had children with them before and after Ishmael and Isaac were born is questionable. Nonetheless, he fathered many children.

However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded.

Ishmael was recorded for a particular reason. Perhaps, to divide the people. 

God who knows and sees everything doan mek mistakes.

Ishmael mother was Egyptian. One would think, she would have taken him back to Egypt. For some unknown reason, it has been cited that Ishmael fathered the Arab people. I doan think he did, bcz at the time Abraham migrtaed from Ur, the whole area was somewhat civilized and people travelled around in the region.

It has been stated the man from Mecca is a direct descendant of Ishmael. How that was determined was not explained in details.

Bible just briefly mentioned Ishmael.

The man from Mecca was very influential among his tribe. He travelled extensively with his uncle with trading caravans, thereby expanding his knowledge . He was trustworthy and respected. He was well read.

By 600CE, the Christians had written extensively about God, The Apostle Paul, a Jew and a Rabi cited many times the connection between God and Christ. In doing so, the lineage of Christ was established. During the period of 600CE, Arabia was rich in trade and they were a sophisticated people. Is like the Middle-Class of India or China.

At the time, when Abraham took Isaac to be slaughtered at Mount Moriah, Abraham thought nothing much of it. It was a common practice in that particular region at the time. Abraham was surrounded by that culture. The line that divided the True God and the False gods was veiled. Satan did all the things that appeared to be righteous.

We have the same situation today, the God of Jews has be declared the same as Allah by American Preachers. The veil is there again. It is worshipper of Allah who declaring the difference in the beliefs.

The man from Mecca revealed he was transported from a mosque in Mecca to Mount Moriah where he ascended into Heaven. His experiences, very simiar to Enoch, Abraham, Isaiah and Jesus, each levitated to heaven. Enoch, Abraham, Isaiah and Jesus was embraced by Yahweh for their righteousness. The man from Mecca, now with a following of his tribemen had declared his special visitation. Just like the other righteous people, favor was bestowed.

BY being a descendant of Ishmael, transported from Mount Moriah-the place of the sacrificial rock, somebody decided to change the accounts of the Bible, deeming it lacking in tranparency and declared Ishmael to be scarifical son. 

In the Book of Enoch, I read what will appen to those who change God's words. The man from Mecca had to experience and witness the same things as Enoch, Abraham, Isaiah and Jesus. Enoch left for us his experiences. 

Righteous peoe are extremely careful wah dem write and declare with the mouth and tongue dat God gave dem.

 

 

seignet posted:
 

Abraham had many concubines and he had children with all of them. Whether he had children with them before and after Ishmael and Isaac were born is questionable. Nonetheless, he fathered many children.

However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded.

 

When people talk stupidness, they should be careful to cover all their tracks.

Below is the story of Judah, Tamar and their two illegitimate sons. One of those ILLIGITIMATE sons, Phares is recorded by Matthew as Jesus' forefather.

At what point was Hager ever referred to as a prostitute? Yet this God of the Bible inspired its writers to record Judah's two sons which he got after screwing his daughter in law on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute. What is with these Biblical characters? Rueben was screwing his step mother on the rooftop.

But that God who sees and knows everything and doesn't make mistakes couldn't find another forefather for his son Jesus.

Tamar and Judah

 
Judah and Tamar,

After Shelah had grown up, Judah became a widower. After Judah mourned the death of his wife, he planned on going to Timnah to shear his sheep. Upon hearing this news, Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute and immediately went to Enaim which was en route to Judah's destination. Upon arriving at Enaim, Judah saw the woman but did not recognize her as Tamar because of the veil she wore over her face. Thinking she was a prostitute, he requested her services. Tamar's plan was to become pregnant by this ruse in order to bear a child in Judah's line, because Judah had not given her to his son Shelah. So she played the part of a prostitute and struck a deal with Judah for a goat with a security deposit of his staff, seal, and cord. When Judah was able to have a goat sent to Enaim, in order to collect his staff and seal, the woman was nowhere to be found and no one knew of any prostitute in Enaim. (Genesis 38:12–23)

Three months later, Tamar was accused of prostitution on account of her pregnancy. Upon hearing this news, Judah ordered that she be burned to death. Tamar sent the staff, seal, and cord to Judah with a message declaring that the owner of these items was the man who had made her pregnant. Upon recognizing his security deposit, Judah released Tamar from her sentence. Tamar's place in the family and Judah's posterity secured, she gives birth to twins, Perez and Zerah. Their birth is reminiscent of the birth of Rebekah's twin sons. The midwife marks Zerah's hand with a scarlet cord when it emerges from the womb first, but Perez is born first.[4] Perez is identified in the Book of Ruth as the ancestor of King David. (Ruth 4:18–22) The Genesis narrative also makes a note that Judah did not have further sexual relations with Tamar. (Genesis 38:24–30)

 

Matthew 1King James Version (KJV)

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;

And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;

10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;

14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;

15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

What audience are you thinking about. Do you really think people come here for your sermon?

Regarding your "here is what I started above" bit, which part of my "Your nonsense about whether Ishmael was present in Abraham's sight does not justify a response except to demonstrate how nonsensical it is" didn't you understand?

About coherence, observe that I write MOSTLY in my own words while you MOSTLY cut and paste other peoples' materials so you are in no position to assess another person's writings.

Am I getting under your skin, lighten up. Thanks for pointing out my typo I don't usually reread my statement and beside my smartphone love to correct what I intend on saying. I'm sure you never had that problem.

You lack understanding b/c you failed to see when God was addesssing Abraham, Isaac was the ONLY son in Abraham presence at that moment where he abode; Hagar and Ishmael were left in the desert. 

Therefore, when God said, 'thy only son', He's referring to the only one left in the house. I known this is a bit too much for you to swallow b/c at some point the issue will arise on whether it was Isaac/Ishmael that was the promise son. 

In the Bible as you know it clearly stated whom Abraham was to take to sacrifice. On the other hand that book of yours would left you in suspense and confusion.

I hope this clarify things for you and the audience, yes audience, as naive you might be people do stop by to see how incompetent you are on a daily basis. But then again it will never be clear for you it's in your nature to be critical and push your own agenda and change subjects as we have seen time and again.

You are getting boring, I'm tired of being repetitive with you.....this is me dropping the phone...I am out for now. Enjoy your weekend, try not to ruin what repetition you have left.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

What audience are you thinking about. Do you really think people come here for your sermon?

Regarding your "here is what I started above" bit, which part of my "Your nonsense about whether Ishmael was present in Abraham's sight does not justify a response except to demonstrate how nonsensical it is" didn't you understand?

About coherence, observe that I write MOSTLY in my own words while you MOSTLY cut and paste other peoples' materials so you are in no position to assess another person's writings.

Am I getting under your skin, lighten up. Thanks for pointing out my typo I don't usually reread my statement and beside my smartphone love to correct what I intend on saying. I'm sure you never had that problem.

You lack understanding b/c you failed to see when God was addesssing Abraham, Isaac was the ONLY son in Abraham presence at that moment where he abode; Hagar and Ishmael were left in the desert. 

Therefore, when God said, 'thy only son', He's referring to the only one left in the house. I known this is a bit too much for you to swallow b/c at some point the issue will arise on whether it was Isaac/Ishmael that was the promise son. 

In the Bible as you know it clearly stated whom Abraham was to take to sacrifice. On the other hand that book of yours would left you in suspense and confusion.

I hope this clarify things for you and the audience, yes audience, as naive you might be people do stop by to see how incompetent you are on a daily basis. But then again it will never be clear for you it's in your nature to be critical and push your own agenda and change subjects as we have seen time and again.

You are getting boring, I'm tired of being repetitive with you.....this is me dropping the phone...I am out. Enjoy your weekend, try not to ruin what repetition you have left.

You don't have the ability to get under my skin dude. I am not a religious hack. That aside, the rest of what you wrote does not make any more sense here than it did before.

ksazam base on my observation during the course of our discussions by far the majority of your statements are either based on ignorance, or are made against better knowledge or at best depend on information selected in a very biased way. I want to credit Andrew for providing the following information, I was reminded that I didn't address the statement concerning the many version of the Bible.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the book "The Light" by al-Haj Sultan Hafiz Abdul (revised by Maulana Syed Zia-ud-Din Ahmad Gilani) we are told that the synoptic writers (i.e. the three recorders of the Gospel that are more historically orientated and as such are rather similar in comparison to the fourth recorder, John, who looks at the events from a more elevated position) of the Gospel are Paul, Luke, Matthew and John. Actually there are only three; John's part of the Gospel is the exception; and Paul did not write an account of the Gospel at all! The "synoptic", as every Christian of even rudimentary learning knows, are: Matthew, Mark and Luke.

Christians rightfully look at "learned men" like this with suspicion, for they cannot make an acceptable contribution. We find it, however, extremely tragic that millions of Muslims get their sole information about the Bible from such uninformed or dishonest men, who build their arguments entirely on one-sided, sifted and selected knowledge, or who argue against better knowledge.

We must, however, hasten to add that by no means all Muslims argue in this rather base spirit. We shall confine our analysis primarily to one book, which is typical in its anti-Christian stance, is relevant to our situation, and is reasonably comprehensive.

We are told, however, that

"What used to be the word of God, has been so adulterated by human hands, that the word of God is hardly distinguishable from the word of man. In some places we do still find a glimmer of the truth that Jesus taught - the gems of divine wisdom that he uttered for the good of his people - but these are few and far between in the jungles of interpolations and contradictions with which the Bible is dense ... Christianity, as we all know, is founded on BLIND BELIEF, where rational thinking plays no part whatever ... It is admitted by the most learned men in the Hebrew language, that the present English version of the Old Testament contains at least 100,000 errors (this would amount to approximately three errors in every verse. G.N.) ... It is not known for certain who in fact wrote any of the books of the Old Testament ... Christians themselves are in disagreement as to what books are inspired."

It is alleged that practically all versions of the Bible have differed from one another and no-one knows yet which is right.

Again and again Christians are asked why there are so many versions. Muslims are surprised to hear that these versions are nothing other than different translations of the same original documents. The 'Authorized' or 'King James Version' dates back to the year A.D. 1611. With the changing of a living language a revision became necessary. In addition to that, many more manuscripts had since been found. Some verses were contained in some of these manuscripts, but not in others (see pp. 17ff.). These texts appear in italics in the 'Revised Versions'. To grasp the extent of these passages in relation to the whole text it ought to be said that besides two portions of 12 verses each (Nos. 5. and 6. on pp. 19-20) and two verses which are omitted for being repetitions (Mark 9:44 and 46 are repeated by vs.48), eight sentences or portions thereof (4) without any bearing on the message or meaning of the text are in question. This makes out 0.1% of the 7959 verses of the New Testament!

Some translations are aimed at great accuracy for the scholar; others are in a popular style avoiding less common words or phrases, catering for the young or less educated reader who is interested in the biblical story and its teaching rather than in theological concepts. The message and content of all is much more identical than the different translations of the Qur'an (i.e. Yusuf Ali, Dawood, Marmaduke Pickthall, George Sale, Rodwell, Arberry etc.).

"Although an extravagant claim is put forward by Bible Societies and other fanatics, that the Bible is the most read book in the world, the contrary is true."

The intimate knowledge claimed by Muslims concerning these things perplexes us. We note, however, that there is little or no substantiation for these claims. The "best known" Bible scholars and commentators referred to are men who are totally obscure personalities.

The fact that Islam has never tolerated textual criticism of the Qur'an, makes it easy for Muslims to assume that all theologians that practice the "higher (or formal) criticism", (not to be confused with textual criticism!) must surely give a true reflection of the Bible. That this is not so, is common knowledge, for "higher criticism" is based on philosophical speculations and makes for arbitrary statements, very often with no Biblical foundation. Speculative theology in the Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries has created vast numbers of claims and speculations, which were neither Biblical nor ever substantiated and were never taken seriously by Christians. To draw material from such theology puts the Bible in a totally false light.

Muslims, however, have concluded that:

"The Bible was once upon a time the word of God"

and that:

"the present Bible can never by any stretch of imagination be called the inspired word of God"

and that:

"faith demands total allegiance to the Bible with its faults, absurdities, everything. Reason, on the other hand, is loath to accept matters that constitute an insult to the human intelligence."

Muslims also ask, referring to the Authorized Version, Revised Version and others,

"What need has the Word of God to go through so many versions? Our reason says, that the true Word of God should have remained unaltered, uncorrupted, unrevised, exactly as it was revealed to Christ."

We have to stop for a moment to consider these allegations.

First of all, the Word of God was not revealed to Jesus. He IS the revelation of God and He IS the Word of God. That is even supported by the Qur'an (Surah 4:171 and 3:45,59).

Then we would have to ask the categorical question: WHEN, WHERE And by WHOM was the Bible changed? Even the Qur'an bears witness that the Torah and the Gospel were definitely in existence during Mohammed's time (pp. 5-6). It goes against the facts to claim that the Bible was changed thereafter.

The Qur'an claims to be sent to guard the former revelations (Surah 5:47-51) and states explicitly that the Torah and Gospel are revelation. That means they came from God and are consequently His Word. The Qur'an also states strongly that no one can change the Words of God (Surah 6:34 and 10:64).

The writings of the New Testament were composed in a certain context of history and time, more than 500 years earlier than the Qur'anic writings, and up to 1,500 years after those of the Old Testament. Unlike Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, Arabic has remained a spoken language greatly influenced by the Qur'an to the present time. Hebrew experienced an interruption as a living language for about 1,500 years, during the time of the Diaspora, and Aramaic is no longer a living language at all. Research work in this century particularly, has greatly expanded our knowledge of Hebrew and has helped solve the language difficulty. This, as well as the inevitable ageing of every language (just try to read a book written 200 years ago) has made it necessary to revise existing translations of the Bible periodically to make the text true to the living language again.

To a Christian the need to read or recite Scripture or prayers in their original (language) makes no sense. Basically we are interested in the content of the message and not in the mechanics of the original. We deem it highly unlikely that the average Christian will manage to gain a knowledge of the original language(s) of the Bible equal to that of the highly qualified teams of linguists that do our translations. Besides that, we firmly believe that God understands us in our language when we worship, praise Him or speak to Him in prayer.

We also cannot subscribe to the Muslim view that the inspired character of a prophetic utterance is suspect when one cannot precisely determine the author. Ultimately the prophet or writer of an inspired message is just a tool in God's hand. If we seek to establish the authenticity of a letter, we do not make this dependent on our knowledge of the make and locality of the pen as long as we are sure that the message is genuine.

The charge that there are 100,000 errors in the Old Testament is too absurd even to need an answer, and the statement, that the Christian faith is essentially blind belief, throws poor light on the information at the disposal of the writer.

Within the framework of a book like this, it is obviously impossible to deal with all claims made against the Bible. There are, however some that are more prominent than others and we shall have to consider these first."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ksazma posted:
seignet posted:
 

Abraham had many concubines and he had children with all of them. Whether he had children with them before and after Ishmael and Isaac were born is questionable. Nonetheless, he fathered many children.

However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded.

 

When people talk stupidness, they should be careful to cover all their tracks.

Below is the story of Judah, Tamar and their two illegitimate sons. One of those ILLIGITIMATE sons, Phares is recorded by Matthew as Jesus' forefather.

At what point was Hager ever referred to as a prostitute? Yet this God of the Bible inspired its writers to record Judah's two sons which he got after screwing his daughter in law on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute. What is with these Biblical characters? Rueben was screwing his step mother on the rooftop.

But that God who sees and knows everything and doesn't make mistakes couldn't find another forefather for his son Jesus.

Tamar and Judah

 
Judah and Tamar,

After Shelah had grown up, Judah became a widower. After Judah mourned the death of his wife, he planned on going to Timnah to shear his sheep. Upon hearing this news, Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute and immediately went to Enaim which was en route to Judah's destination. Upon arriving at Enaim, Judah saw the woman but did not recognize her as Tamar because of the veil she wore over her face. Thinking she was a prostitute, he requested her services. Tamar's plan was to become pregnant by this ruse in order to bear a child in Judah's line, because Judah had not given her to his son Shelah. So she played the part of a prostitute and struck a deal with Judah for a goat with a security deposit of his staff, seal, and cord. When Judah was able to have a goat sent to Enaim, in order to collect his staff and seal, the woman was nowhere to be found and no one knew of any prostitute in Enaim. (Genesis 38:12–23)

Three months later, Tamar was accused of prostitution on account of her pregnancy. Upon hearing this news, Judah ordered that she be burned to death. Tamar sent the staff, seal, and cord to Judah with a message declaring that the owner of these items was the man who had made her pregnant. Upon recognizing his security deposit, Judah released Tamar from her sentence. Tamar's place in the family and Judah's posterity secured, she gives birth to twins, Perez and Zerah. Their birth is reminiscent of the birth of Rebekah's twin sons. The midwife marks Zerah's hand with a scarlet cord when it emerges from the womb first, but Perez is born first.[4] Perez is identified in the Book of Ruth as the ancestor of King David. (Ruth 4:18–22) The Genesis narrative also makes a note that Judah did not have further sexual relations with Tamar. (Genesis 38:24–30)

 

Matthew 1King James Version (KJV)

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;

And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;

10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;

14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;

15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

What should we learn from ksazma post concerning Judah Tamar? Here is my cut and paste take for you below, I wonder what ksazma think he has accomplish by his post above?         

There are two women named Tamar mentioned in Scripture. Both are tragic figures, women who were ruined by the neglect and abuse of close family members. Their stories seem to be included in Scripture for the purpose of providing historical and spiritual information about the Messianic line.

Jacob’s son Judah, patriarch of the line of Judah had three sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah. A woman named Tamar married Er, but then Er died, leaving her a widow. Since it was required that the next of kin care for a brother’s widow, Tamar was given to Onan, but he also died. Shelah was still a boy and could not marry Tamar, so Judah asked her to return to her father’s house and wait until Shelah was grown up. However, once Shelah was old enough, Judah did not honor his promise. Tamar remained an unmarried widow. Tamar then went into town disguised as a prostitute, tricked Judah, and got him to sleep with her. She then became pregnant by Judah and bore twin sons named Perez and Zerah. -Genesis 38-.

The other Tamar was King David’s daughter. She had a brother, Absalom, and a half-brother, Amnon. Amnon had an obsessive desire for his half-sister Tamar, and one day he pretended to be sick and called for her to come to him in his bedroom to help him. When she was there alone with him, he raped her. Unfortunately, though David was angry, he did not punish Amnon or require him to marry Tamar, so Absalom took it upon himself to murder Amnon in revenge (2 Samuel 13:1–22). Absalom’s anger and bitterness toward his father because of these events eventually led to his attempt to usurp his throne and to disgrace David by committing public immorality with his father’s concubines.

We would expect the twin sons of Judah’s incestuous union with his daughter-in-law to be outcasts, hidden away, or perhaps not even mentioned in the Bible. However, surprisingly, the Messianic line continues through Tamar’s son Perez. God did not provide a “cleaner” way to continue the line that would eventually include His Son. Perez was the ancestor of Jesus of Nazereth.

It is the same with King David’s story. Absalom’s anger and rejection of his father’s rule seem to have been born out of a festering bitterness toward David. Though Absalom was clearly in the wrong for the murder of Amnon, we sympathize with him, and we sympathize with his disgraced sister. Considering David’s own immorality and the murder he committed, it is easy to see why Absalom thought himself the better man. But, despite David’s faults, God still chose to continue the line of the Messiah through David rather than through Absalom.

Why are these unpleasant stories included in Scripture, and why are the people involved people who hurt others, even their own family members granted the privilege of being included in the Messianic line? It may be simply to show us that God’s purpose is accomplished despite man’s unrighteousness. In Hebrews 11 there is a long list of Old Testament people who are commended for their faith, and among them are many sinful people who did dreadful things. But, because they believed God, their faith was credited to them as righteousness (Genesis 15:6).

Keith posted:

ksazam base on my observation during the course of our discussions by far the majority of your statements are either based on ignorance, or are made against better knowledge or at best depend on information selected in a very biased way. I want to credit Andrew for providing the following information, I was reminded that I didn't address the statement concerning the many version of the Bible.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the book "The Light" by al-Haj Sultan Hafiz Abdul (revised by Maulana Syed Zia-ud-Din Ahmad Gilani) we are told that the synoptic writers (i.e. the three recorders of the Gospel that are more historically orientated and as such are rather similar in comparison to the fourth recorder, John, who looks at the events from a more elevated position) of the Gospel are Paul, Luke, Matthew and John. Actually there are only three; John's part of the Gospel is the exception; and Paul did not write an account of the Gospel at all! The "synoptic", as every Christian of even rudimentary learning knows, are: Matthew, Mark and Luke.

Christians rightfully look at "learned men" like this with suspicion, for they cannot make an acceptable contribution. We find it, however, extremely tragic that millions of Muslims get their sole information about the Bible from such uninformed or dishonest men, who build their arguments entirely on one-sided, sifted and selected knowledge, or who argue against better knowledge.

We must, however, hasten to add that by no means all Muslims argue in this rather base spirit. We shall confine our analysis primarily to one book, which is typical in its anti-Christian stance, is relevant to our situation, and is reasonably comprehensive.

We are told, however, that

"What used to be the word of God, has been so adulterated by human hands, that the word of God is hardly distinguishable from the word of man. In some places we do still find a glimmer of the truth that Jesus taught - the gems of divine wisdom that he uttered for the good of his people - but these are few and far between in the jungles of interpolations and contradictions with which the Bible is dense ... Christianity, as we all know, is founded on BLIND BELIEF, where rational thinking plays no part whatever ... It is admitted by the most learned men in the Hebrew language, that the present English version of the Old Testament contains at least 100,000 errors (this would amount to approximately three errors in every verse. G.N.) ... It is not known for certain who in fact wrote any of the books of the Old Testament ... Christians themselves are in disagreement as to what books are inspired."

It is alleged that practically all versions of the Bible have differed from one another and no-one knows yet which is right.

Again and again Christians are asked why there are so many versions. Muslims are surprised to hear that these versions are nothing other than different translations of the same original documents. The 'Authorized' or 'King James Version' dates back to the year A.D. 1611. With the changing of a living language a revision became necessary. In addition to that, many more manuscripts had since been found. Some verses were contained in some of these manuscripts, but not in others (see pp. 17ff.). These texts appear in italics in the 'Revised Versions'. To grasp the extent of these passages in relation to the whole text it ought to be said that besides two portions of 12 verses each (Nos. 5. and 6. on pp. 19-20) and two verses which are omitted for being repetitions (Mark 9:44 and 46 are repeated by vs.48), eight sentences or portions thereof (4) without any bearing on the message or meaning of the text are in question. This makes out 0.1% of the 7959 verses of the New Testament!

Some translations are aimed at great accuracy for the scholar; others are in a popular style avoiding less common words or phrases, catering for the young or less educated reader who is interested in the biblical story and its teaching rather than in theological concepts. The message and content of all is much more identical than the different translations of the Qur'an (i.e. Yusuf Ali, Dawood, Marmaduke Pickthall, George Sale, Rodwell, Arberry etc.).

"Although an extravagant claim is put forward by Bible Societies and other fanatics, that the Bible is the most read book in the world, the contrary is true."

The intimate knowledge claimed by Muslims concerning these things perplexes us. We note, however, that there is little or no substantiation for these claims. The "best known" Bible scholars and commentators referred to are men who are totally obscure personalities.

The fact that Islam has never tolerated textual criticism of the Qur'an, makes it easy for Muslims to assume that all theologians that practice the "higher (or formal) criticism", (not to be confused with textual criticism!) must surely give a true reflection of the Bible. That this is not so, is common knowledge, for "higher criticism" is based on philosophical speculations and makes for arbitrary statements, very often with no Biblical foundation. Speculative theology in the Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries has created vast numbers of claims and speculations, which were neither Biblical nor ever substantiated and were never taken seriously by Christians. To draw material from such theology puts the Bible in a totally false light.

Muslims, however, have concluded that:

"The Bible was once upon a time the word of God"

and that:

"the present Bible can never by any stretch of imagination be called the inspired word of God"

and that:

"faith demands total allegiance to the Bible with its faults, absurdities, everything. Reason, on the other hand, is loath to accept matters that constitute an insult to the human intelligence."

Muslims also ask, referring to the Authorized Version, Revised Version and others,

"What need has the Word of God to go through so many versions? Our reason says, that the true Word of God should have remained unaltered, uncorrupted, unrevised, exactly as it was revealed to Christ."

We have to stop for a moment to consider these allegations.

First of all, the Word of God was not revealed to Jesus. He IS the revelation of God and He IS the Word of God. That is even supported by the Qur'an (Surah 4:171 and 3:45,59).

Then we would have to ask the categorical question: WHEN, WHERE And by WHOM was the Bible changed? Even the Qur'an bears witness that the Torah and the Gospel were definitely in existence during Mohammed's time (pp. 5-6). It goes against the facts to claim that the Bible was changed thereafter.

The Qur'an claims to be sent to guard the former revelations (Surah 5:47-51) and states explicitly that the Torah and Gospel are revelation. That means they came from God and are consequently His Word. The Qur'an also states strongly that no one can change the Words of God (Surah 6:34 and 10:64).

The writings of the New Testament were composed in a certain context of history and time, more than 500 years earlier than the Qur'anic writings, and up to 1,500 years after those of the Old Testament. Unlike Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, Arabic has remained a spoken language greatly influenced by the Qur'an to the present time. Hebrew experienced an interruption as a living language for about 1,500 years, during the time of the Diaspora, and Aramaic is no longer a living language at all. Research work in this century particularly, has greatly expanded our knowledge of Hebrew and has helped solve the language difficulty. This, as well as the inevitable ageing of every language (just try to read a book written 200 years ago) has made it necessary to revise existing translations of the Bible periodically to make the text true to the living language again.

To a Christian the need to read or recite Scripture or prayers in their original (language) makes no sense. Basically we are interested in the content of the message and not in the mechanics of the original. We deem it highly unlikely that the average Christian will manage to gain a knowledge of the original language(s) of the Bible equal to that of the highly qualified teams of linguists that do our translations. Besides that, we firmly believe that God understands us in our language when we worship, praise Him or speak to Him in prayer.

We also cannot subscribe to the Muslim view that the inspired character of a prophetic utterance is suspect when one cannot precisely determine the author. Ultimately the prophet or writer of an inspired message is just a tool in God's hand. If we seek to establish the authenticity of a letter, we do not make this dependent on our knowledge of the make and locality of the pen as long as we are sure that the message is genuine.

The charge that there are 100,000 errors in the Old Testament is too absurd even to need an answer, and the statement, that the Christian faith is essentially blind belief, throws poor light on the information at the disposal of the writer.

Within the framework of a book like this, it is obviously impossible to deal with all claims made against the Bible. There are, however some that are more prominent than others and we shall have to consider these first."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Long story that ignores the facts. Correction, Andrew above is plain lying about the facts of the Bible. They are not translations. They are different versions. The Roman Catholic Bible is a different version with its 73 books than the Protestant Bibles with their 66 books. The Jehovahs have different version to the point that regular Christians don't see Jehovahs as Christians. Other regular Christians don't regard Catholics as Christians either. So Andrew can lie how much he wants and you can swallow it up how much you want but one has to be blinded in faith at accept Andrew's lies above.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
seignet posted:
 

Abraham had many concubines and he had children with all of them. Whether he had children with them before and after Ishmael and Isaac were born is questionable. Nonetheless, he fathered many children.

However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded.

 

When people talk stupidness, they should be careful to cover all their tracks.

Below is the story of Judah, Tamar and their two illegitimate sons. One of those ILLIGITIMATE sons, Phares is recorded by Matthew as Jesus' forefather.

At what point was Hager ever referred to as a prostitute? Yet this God of the Bible inspired its writers to record Judah's two sons which he got after screwing his daughter in law on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute. What is with these Biblical characters? Rueben was screwing his step mother on the rooftop.

But that God who sees and knows everything and doesn't make mistakes couldn't find another forefather for his son Jesus.

Tamar and Judah

 
Judah and Tamar,

After Shelah had grown up, Judah became a widower. After Judah mourned the death of his wife, he planned on going to Timnah to shear his sheep. Upon hearing this news, Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute and immediately went to Enaim which was en route to Judah's destination. Upon arriving at Enaim, Judah saw the woman but did not recognize her as Tamar because of the veil she wore over her face. Thinking she was a prostitute, he requested her services. Tamar's plan was to become pregnant by this ruse in order to bear a child in Judah's line, because Judah had not given her to his son Shelah. So she played the part of a prostitute and struck a deal with Judah for a goat with a security deposit of his staff, seal, and cord. When Judah was able to have a goat sent to Enaim, in order to collect his staff and seal, the woman was nowhere to be found and no one knew of any prostitute in Enaim. (Genesis 38:12–23)

Three months later, Tamar was accused of prostitution on account of her pregnancy. Upon hearing this news, Judah ordered that she be burned to death. Tamar sent the staff, seal, and cord to Judah with a message declaring that the owner of these items was the man who had made her pregnant. Upon recognizing his security deposit, Judah released Tamar from her sentence. Tamar's place in the family and Judah's posterity secured, she gives birth to twins, Perez and Zerah. Their birth is reminiscent of the birth of Rebekah's twin sons. The midwife marks Zerah's hand with a scarlet cord when it emerges from the womb first, but Perez is born first.[4] Perez is identified in the Book of Ruth as the ancestor of King David. (Ruth 4:18–22) The Genesis narrative also makes a note that Judah did not have further sexual relations with Tamar. (Genesis 38:24–30)

 

Matthew 1King James Version (KJV)

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;

And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;

10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;

14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;

15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

What should we learn from ksazma post concerning Judah Tamar? Here is my cut and paste take for you below, I wonder what ksazma think he has accomplish by his post above?         

There are two women named Tamar mentioned in Scripture. Both are tragic figures, women who were ruined by the neglect and abuse of close family members. Their stories seem to be included in Scripture for the purpose of providing historical and spiritual information about the Messianic line.

Jacob’s son Judah, patriarch of the line of Judah had three sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah. A woman named Tamar married Er, but then Er died, leaving her a widow. Since it was required that the next of kin care for a brother’s widow, Tamar was given to Onan, but he also died. Shelah was still a boy and could not marry Tamar, so Judah asked her to return to her father’s house and wait until Shelah was grown up. However, once Shelah was old enough, Judah did not honor his promise. Tamar remained an unmarried widow. Tamar then went into town disguised as a prostitute, tricked Judah, and got him to sleep with her. She then became pregnant by Judah and bore twin sons named Perez and Zerah. -Genesis 38-.

The other Tamar was King David’s daughter. She had a brother, Absalom, and a half-brother, Amnon. Amnon had an obsessive desire for his half-sister Tamar, and one day he pretended to be sick and called for her to come to him in his bedroom to help him. When she was there alone with him, he raped her. Unfortunately, though David was angry, he did not punish Amnon or require him to marry Tamar, so Absalom took it upon himself to murder Amnon in revenge (2 Samuel 13:1–22). Absalom’s anger and bitterness toward his father because of these events eventually led to his attempt to usurp his throne and to disgrace David by committing public immorality with his father’s concubines.

We would expect the twin sons of Judah’s incestuous union with his daughter-in-law to be outcasts, hidden away, or perhaps not even mentioned in the Bible. However, surprisingly, the Messianic line continues through Tamar’s son Perez. God did not provide a “cleaner” way to continue the line that would eventually include His Son. Perez was the ancestor of Jesus of Nazereth.

It is the same with King David’s story. Absalom’s anger and rejection of his father’s rule seem to have been born out of a festering bitterness toward David. Though Absalom was clearly in the wrong for the murder of Amnon, we sympathize with him, and we sympathize with his disgraced sister. Considering David’s own immorality and the murder he committed, it is easy to see why Absalom thought himself the better man. But, despite David’s faults, God still chose to continue the line of the Messiah through David rather than through Absalom.

Why are these unpleasant stories included in Scripture, and why are the people involved people who hurt others, even their own family members granted the privilege of being included in the Messianic line? It may be simply to show us that God’s purpose is accomplished despite man’s unrighteousness. In Hebrews 11 there is a long list of Old Testament people who are commended for their faith, and among them are many sinful people who did dreadful things. But, because they believed God, their faith was credited to them as righteousness (Genesis 15:6).

Now, what does any of what you wrote above have to do with my response to the following "However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded"?

You have a knack for missing the point.

To recap. Saggabai stated that

"However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded"

This is quite interesting in light of the fact that Judah's two illegitimate sons are recorded and one is even one of Jesus' forefathers. Now these two illegitimate son came about because their father Judah screwed his daughter in law, Tamar on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute.

Then we have Jacob's son, Rueben who screwed his step mother on the rooftop. He too was recorded.

If these are the kinds of people who gets recorded in the Bible, one would be so much better off not being recorded there.

Even the two whoring sisters are recorded. Even Samson is recorded. Samson who went to Gaza, saw a whore and went into her. These dudes have a habit of seeing a woman and just going into them. I at least buy ladies a drink first before I go into them.

Keith posted:

 Like I said before I was not aware Jesus was lost.

That story about being in the wilderness 40 days and 40 nights, remember?

Next we will hear John the Baptist was lost too.

Not all of him, just his head, it was said, remember?

cain posted:
antabanta posted

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

Yes he is, so is Thor his son, I got some Marvel books on him.

Cain, Thor was my favorite Marvel hero. Makes sense that this new flame throwing Thor is going to pitch for the New York Mets on opening day. I believe they are grossly underpaying him though.

Image result for noah syndergaard contract

ksazma posted:

To recap. Saggabai stated that

"However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded"

This is quite interesting in light of the fact that Judah's two illegitimate sons are recorded and one is even one of Jesus' forefathers. Now these two illegitimate son came about because their father Judah screwed his daughter in law, Tamar on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute.

Then we have Jacob's son, Rueben who screwed his step mother on the rooftop. He too was recorded.

If these are the kinds of people who gets recorded in the Bible, one would be so much better off not being recorded there.

Speaking about knack of missing the point, what more could be expected of you the lack of reading and understanding.

"Why are these unpleasant stories included in Scripture, and why are the people involved people who hurt others, even their own family members granted the privilege of being included in the Messianic line? It may be simply to show us that God’s purpose is accomplished despite man’s unrighteousness. In Hebrews 11 there is a long list of Old Testament people who are commended for their faith, and among them are many sinful people who did dreadful things. But, because they believed God, their faith was credited to them as righteousness (Genesis 15:6).

cain posted:
Keith posted:

 Like I said before I was not aware Jesus was lost.

That story about being in the wilderness 40 days and 40 nights, remember?

Next we will hear John the Baptist was lost too.

Not all of him, just his head, it was said, remember?

During those 40 days and nights even Satan tempted Jesus. Heard of Satan tempting people but don't know how Satan would tempt God.

The Bible teaches that the devil is the enemy of God. I don't accept that concept as the devil would be in no position to be the enemy of God if God is on this way much higher platform. It is more reasonable to think that the devil could only be the enemy of man since they would be on the same level/platform. I don't know why people insist that man sin against God either. Religiously speaking, man's actions whether good or bad does not alter the stature or standing of God. Here again, it is more reasonable to think that if human beings sin, they are doing so against their own souls. Here is what I think is another misconception. The notion that God is a jealous God. How does a supreme being become jealous when there is not an equal to him? God would be quite confused to be jealous of others when he is supposedly so much more supreme to them. If my wife was drooling over a stud on tv, that wouldn't bother me. Now if that stud was down the street, I might be affected because I may begin to worry where else is he down. Now if I can be that reasonable, why can't this wise and magnificent God?

Two potentially interesting shows on CNN tonight, Finding Jesus and Believer. I intend to watch them. It may be time well spent.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

To recap. Saggabai stated that

"However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded"

This is quite interesting in light of the fact that Judah's two illegitimate sons are recorded and one is even one of Jesus' forefathers. Now these two illegitimate son came about because their father Judah screwed his daughter in law, Tamar on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute.

Then we have Jacob's son, Rueben who screwed his step mother on the rooftop. He too was recorded.

If these are the kinds of people who gets recorded in the Bible, one would be so much better off not being recorded there.

Speaking about knack of missing the point, what more could be expected of you the lack of reading and understanding.

"Why are these unpleasant stories included in Scripture, and why are the people involved people who hurt others, even their own family members granted the privilege of being included in the Messianic line? It may be simply to show us that God’s purpose is accomplished despite man’s unrighteousness. In Hebrews 11 there is a long list of Old Testament people who are commended for their faith, and among them are many sinful people who did dreadful things. But, because they believed God, their faith was credited to them as righteousness (Genesis 15:6)."

The passage stated; "Samson went to Gaza, saw a whore and went into her". (full stop). Nothing else said about that incident there. It was not followed up by God reprimanding Samson for going into a whore just because he saw her. (Maybe she was a Palestinian whore and we saw the many incidents in the Bible where God seems to hate the Palestinians so God may be well pleased with him screwing her. We remember the story of the Moabites where God commanded Moses and Aaron to kill everyone else, man, woman and children. Except the virgins who were of sex having age. And they even gave God 16 thousands of these virgins. This God was quite bigoted). God did not give him the talk about morality. God did not warn him about STDs. God did not even tell him that he can end up with HIV/AIDS. None of the sorts. Since God inspired the writers to write these passages, what message did God conveyed by "Samson went to Gaza, saw a whore and went into her". (full stop).

Like Anil,s Uncle...Sampson was a knock man.

Kaz I am impressed u actually read the Bible;. In the past as a little lad the Bible was used to lift me up....when I went for a hair cut the barber would have me sit on one to get more height.

cain posted:

Like Anil,s Uncle...Sampson was a knock man.

Kaz I am impressed u actually read the Bible;. In the past as a little lad the Bible was used to lift me up....when I went for a hair cut the barber would have me sit on one to get more height.

You sat on a bible and yet you wutliss? Bai, god can't even help you.