Debate Stemming From "Caution Re: Jesuit Exposes" - Page 18

**cmar1965** · #**171** 12-11-2007, 04:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmar1965

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Jayhan

Your the one who brought them up Cmar. Not me. And I was simply playing the "devils advocate."

Well actually Phil, it is YOU whom first brought the books dating prior to 6BCE or after 6CE into the equation. I merely fulfilled your request of:

Quote:

Could you please tell me what other books have survived from the year --06 A.D.??-- Or before 6 A.D.--?? Because it's an awfully short list; But can you name them?

with examples of books dating back significantly earlier than 6BCE.

Quote:

But why would they be any more reliable than what you call "The Christian bible?"

Again, you have not advised in which context you mean "reliability"? In what way? Content of document? Age of document? Could you please qualify that?

Quote:

I would suggest the possibility that all the enmity towards the Bible is simply based upon what is contained therein. I think its about that simple.

Perhaps for some, but I actually don't have issue with the content of the bible per se, and I have it placed on our bookshelf between the books of mythology and fantasy fiction. Fits there perfectly! ;)

Quote:

The Bible is confirmed by itself, by the more sure word of prophecy. There are no less than 300 prophecies concerning the coming of Christ alone in the Old Testament, with one book going so far as to give the exact date of his arrival;

Yes, I realise there are many "prophecies' and as you stated the "confirmation" of any of these things actually(or alleged) BEING fulfilled are in the pages of that book and that book alone. They too are all quite vague and therefore allowing liberal interpretation. I assume too you are referring to Daniel as to the alleged "exact" date of jc's - or "the messiah's" "arrival"? hmm.. uh hu! You are making the claim, can you support it?

Quote:

Perhaps this is odious to some people, and I can certainly understand why. Because it makes claims about humanity and individuals which make people "uncomfortable" to say the least. And peoples natural reaction, all through time, is to try and turn the bible into a lie, rather than to believe it and conform their lives to the truths contained therein; I suggest that this is where all of the enmity and implacable hatred of the bible comes from. At least 95% of it anyways.

You know it's funny Phil. I rarely if ever hear non-"believers" use the word HATRED(I did just now simply to reply to you on this point), well at least the ones I associate with. I do have to say though in my christian days, the word rolled off the tongue of just about each and every person (including myself) i associated with, like saliva, dribbling down a Rottweillers mouth. The bible however promotes hatred,jealousy (Jealous IS "gods" name, remember), fear, oppression, submission and supression so it is not difficult to understand WHY these things are in the forefront of the christian "mindset". I for one will never go back to the conformity of that negative promotion as these negative connotations do not promote love in any way, except "love" ONLY for Mr Jealous.

I realise you are an advocate of the Pauline doctrine, however I note you mention specifically and regularly "Mars Hill". yes that is all good and just one example of his alleged commentary, however, what of Pauls (going by what you "believe"..from KJV) bully-boy tactics elsewhere? He was an arsehole, quite frankly, so was the Mars Hill speil "love talk" or manipulation?

I am happy to investigate each and every one of the Pauline "letters" with you here if you like Phil and any other "prophetic claim" you want to explore.

Let me know.

I see you have been posting since this Phil, so just popping it up for your reply as promised:

Phil wrote:

Quote:

I will reply to a few more points as time permits, but for now am distracted with trying to find a ride into Fairbanks to take care of some business.

:D..... Look forward to it

Phil Jayhan · #**172** 12-11-2007, 04:57

Well, I got a ride into fairbanks, and had a fruitful journey. Only to be doubly freaked out when I finally got home and went to get a pop next door. And of course your looking forward to my next words Cmar! As man shall not live by bread alone but by every word which procceds from the mouth of Philman....

Doh~!
Phil

**cmar1965** · #**173** 12-11-2007, 06:04

Iscribe2 wrote:

Quote:

Iscribe2 wrote:
2 penny thoughts

Good and evil:
As a parent you "know" what will hurt, maim, and/or kill people. So you teach your children about "dangers" and how to avoid them. You say "do this" or "stay away from that or else this will happen" and kids will test things to find out if what you said is true and/or learn by failures and accomplishments.
What if you said "don't do this or you will die" not to punish, but that it was just a natural result to follow what you did (like if you stepped off a 25 story building. Splat. dead.)
KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL
what if, as a child, you were protected, and so knew only good. and the temptation is not about what you know--what you already have known--but about the unknown--what you don't have, so you choose to KNOW evil--and then you realize that to know evil you must see every facet, every ugly vile abhorrent thing about what evil is, because if you don't, your choice to know evil has not truly been honored. And the parent realizes what the child in its innocence does not. And so, the child stepped off that 25 story building. As a parent, what would/could you do?
children will do that, test the boundaries. How do you keep your children from stepping off that 25 story building?
What are some things that typical parents do?

CMAR?
Anyone else here a parent?
Boundaries: do you impose any?

I have and do.

Gotta go, sorry to interrupt. Back to you all now

Hi Iscribe,

Yes indeed I do have 2 children (15 and 7). Both girls. Of course there are certain "boundaries".. as in for example: Don't touch the hotplate as you will be burned, there is "stranger danger" issues and with the teen especially at THIS point, talk of drugs, alcohol and sex issues. I suppose my hubby and I are fortunate in this regard. Our teen is a "level" girl . You may think it is just "mum talk" but she is NOT like the rebelious cookie-cutter teen. She at 15 STILL tells me she loves me, hugs me and actually WANTS to be seen in public with me! lol There are people on this forum whom have spoken with my oldest baby as well as to me. (I do mention my teen specifically here as kids, 10 yrs of age and under are like on their OWN "trip" of some sort! lol...perhaps it is just MY kids? *pondering* back to my teen. The thing is, as with her and her younger sibling, we have not really "taught" to either of them the "GOOD v EVIL" angle per se, but rather action and the resulting reaction/consequence.

Personally, we don't see the NEED to instill "fear"(depicted as EVIL) as such, but BOTH kids 7 "trippy" and also Miss 15 yr old, understand that jumping off of a 25 ft building is unwise.-dad is a science/physics teacher as well- but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to sort of realise that falling that far down and "SPLAT" would at the bare minimum HURT. However I am trying to fathom why you would construe that self action as "EVIL", unless their intent was to actually ,knowingly fall on people to take their lives as well? Unless that IS the case, where is the "evil" intent?

Perhaps you are reflecting on your own taught concepts from childhood with the GvE thing?

Iscribe2, my 15 yr old is at the moment exploring any doctrine she wishes to, whether it be SELF, chistianity, taoism, buddhism...etc etc etc.. in THAT regard, her belief system is HER OWN journey and, although I personally my NOT "do" her "thing" it is HER thing and if it makes her happy, then that is all I could want as a mum.*shrug*

For the record too, Miss 7 also does "religious instruction" at school as she too chose to check it out.

We can teach our children of certain "dangers", but teaching them what to watch out for does NOT guarantee their safety, a lot of times, even in the home, whether "faith" followers or otherwise.

That being the case, I truly fail to see what the point of your post and intent was? Care to explain?

Phil Jayhan · #**174** 12-11-2007, 06:16

Traci--

Come on please! Your little girl goes to touch the hot bubbling oil on the stove and you don't scream at her? Hoping to head her off before she dumps it on her chest? I have scars on my own chest from just such an incident, and still to this day remember not only my Mother screaming out at the top of her lungs for me to stop by my brothers and sister as well. They just came a tad too late. The pot was spilled and my chest covered in hot bubbling veggie oil.

Yet you fail to see how this is relevant? Come on, Puleeeeeeese!

It's an analogy. And it works fine to illustrate a point. And you damn well know it, or are simply being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn.

Also, please check your PM box, as I am ready to go to bed and want you to see that thread before I move it back to private. Thnx---

cheerio m8---
phil

**cmar1965** · #**175** 12-11-2007, 06:52

Um Phil?

I actually covered the "don't touch the hotplate as it will burn" thing in my original post on this thread to iscribe. What can I say? My children actually listen to logic! Shocker, huh?

Again, even with your analogy included, it does not make iscribes comments any clearer to me.

perhaps you should just go to bed. Looks like you need to visit the alphabet store, Phil!

Nighty night, but I DO look forward to your reply to my post directed at YOU when I wake up!

I am SOOOOO looking forward to our board "discussion" as to biblical "Paul" and all other things mentioned. ;)

cmar.

Phil Jayhan · #**176** 12-11-2007, 07:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmar1965

Um Phil?

I actually covered the "don't touch the hotplate as it will burn" thing in my original post on this thread to iscribe. What can I say? My children actually listen to logic! Shocker, huh?

Again, even with your analogy included, it does not make iscribes comments any clearer to me.

perhaps you should just go to bed. Looks like you need to visit the alphabet store, Phil!

Nighty night, but I DO look forward to your reply to my post directed at YOU when I wake up!

I am SOOOOO looking forward to our board "discussion" as to biblical "Paul" and all other things mentioned. ;)

cmar.

Have you copied the thread I moved for your pleasure? Cause I want to go to bed and move it back to private till it is finished; Did you copy all 8 pages?

Thnx-
phil

**cmar1965** · #**177** 12-11-2007, 19:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Jayhan

Traci--

Come on please! Your little girl goes to touch the hot bubbling oil on the stove and you don't scream at her? Hoping to head her off before she dumps it on her chest? I have scars on my own chest from just such an incident, and still to this day remember not only my Mother screaming out at the top of her lungs for me to stop by my brothers and sister as well. They just came a tad too late. The pot was spilled and my chest covered in hot bubbling veggie oil.

Yet you fail to see how this is relevant? Come on, Puleeeeeeese!

It's an analogy. And it works fine to illustrate a point. And you damn well know it, or are simply being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn.

cheerio m8---
phil

Hey Phil,

I just re-read your analogy and I am so sorry you had to suffer those burns, but I still don't see what that analogy has to do with iscribes comments of GvE.

In YOUR analogy, whom do you claim is/are the allegedly "evil" party/parties and WHY to you, is the analogy relevant?

T.

Phil Jayhan · #**178** 12-12-2007, 02:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmar1965

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Jayhan

Traci--

Come on please! Your little girl goes to touch the hot bubbling oil on the stove and you don't scream at her? Hoping to head her off before she dumps it on her chest? I have scars on my own chest from just such an incident, and still to this day remember not only my Mother screaming out at the top of her lungs for me to stop by my brothers and sister as well. They just came a tad too late. The pot was spilled and my chest covered in hot bubbling veggie oil.

Yet you fail to see how this is relevant? Come on, Puleeeeeeese!

It's an analogy. And it works fine to illustrate a point. And you damn well know it, or are simply being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn.

cheerio m8---
phil

Hey Phil,

I just re-read your analogy and I am so sorry you had to suffer those burns, but I still don't see what that analogy has to do with iscribes comments of GvE.

In YOUR analogy, whom do you claim is/are the allegedly "evil" party/parties and WHY to you, is the analogy relevant?

T.

Come on Cmar, this is simple stuff, you have to be pulling my plug m8.

The analogy is relevant. The evil party was the burning pot of oil. The point is simple enough, at least to me, that Gods laws aren't meant to be restrictive in the least. They are there to protect us, as well as to teach us how to live as a society. I guess perhaps one of the things we should discuss is why some of us see God and the bible as non restrictive, and liberating, while others see the same book as a prison. And why the former see's Gods love, while the latter only see what they perceive as negative attributes, and an angry God.

Sorry I didn't respond sooner, but have literally had all my time soaked up with banning the spamtards. I have banned 58 of them today and had to reset 58 profiles. It will be up to 75 by the time I go to bed. And it is the same damned bot, using multiple IP's.

cheers-
phil

**person** · #**179** 12-12-2007, 03:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Jayhan

The point is simple enough, at least to me, that Gods laws aren't meant to be restrictive in the least. They are there to protect us, as well as to teach us how to live as a society.

Number 2 on the top 10 I believe

Quote:

Thou shalt have no other gods before me

If it is omnipotent then why even the need for this, especially at #2?
Sounds like a shit scared, made the fuck up god, with an inferiority complex.

How friggin restrictive can you get?

Yes it is simple stuff Phil.

Phil Jayhan · #**180** 12-12-2007, 04:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by person

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil Jayhan

The point is simple enough, at least to me, that Gods laws aren't meant to be restrictive in the least. They are there to protect us, as well as to teach us how to live as a society.

Number 2 on the top 10 I believe

Quote:

Thou shalt have no other gods before me

If it is omnipotent then why even the need for this, especially at #2?
Sounds like a shit scared, made the fuck up god, with an inferiority complex.

How friggin restrictive can you get?

Yes it is simple stuff Phil.

You see, I guess it is just perspective, person. I view myself as made by God, for infinite happiness, and this perfect happiness only comes from worshiping the one true God, whom I view him to be. And when man or woman strays from this truth, it makes us miserable. (e.g.To worship gods who by nature are not a God.)

Thats why I said above it is all really according to perspective. I see that commandment as something which frees a person. Thou shalt have no other gods before me is a liberating commandment because there are no other true gods. There is only one. So, ya, it's according to perspective. Inferiority complex? God? I don't even know how he could have one being the Supreme God of the Universe, and all powerful.

He could us squish like a bug in a nano-second if he wanted to. But thats not his nature. He is kind, forgiving, merciful and full of undeserved kindness. Like I said, its all about perspective. And your perspctive of God is completely different than my own.

Cheers-
phil

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode