Subject:
|
Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 30 Mar 2001 16:35:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2847 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Robert Bevens writes:
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 14:51:41 GMT, "Ryan Farrington"
> <ryanjf@ifriendly.com> wrote:
> I dunno,
> maybe I need to invest in some kind of "The Bible For Dummy's" or
> something.
Actually, that isn't a bad idea! :-) (I mean, that there should be such a
"Dummies" book)
>
> > Man is sinful and will always kill and
> > destroy until he is no longer sinful. But man cannot become non-sinful by
> > himself.
>
> Is it a sin to think about killing and destruction?
If you are Catholic.
>
> > Genesis 6:5--"Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was
> > great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was
> > only evil continually."
>
> If God wrote the bible why does he refer to himself in the third
> person so much? o_O
Divinely inspired by God. When quoting the Bible in term papers (biblical
scenes being popular in many periods of art), I'd always list the author as
"various, with the assistance of a Holy Ghost Writer". :-)
>
> > > Robert: "Isn't it amazing that in this day and age the absolute "truth"
> > about existence can be found on a poorly engineered web site on the Inet
> > that also includes fascinating reading material on HAM radio, paper
> > airplanes, music, and Lego's of all things. Why if only I had known about
> > this site earlier in my life. One can only wonder why the
> > "truth" isn't being advertised all over mainstream media this very second."
>
> > The truth can also be found in the Bible, not merely on my website.
>
> Probably, but then we wouldn't get to read your insightful
> interpretations of it, now would we?
If it bothers you, don't read it. I don't see what's wrong with expressing
oneself on their own website.
>
> > The
> > reason the truth isn't being broadcast all across the media is because man
> > is sinful, he can't face a just and holy God who can't tolerate sin.
Then why the Bible in the first place? Clearly *some* people can (face a
just and holy God who can't tolerate sin). Some don't even really need the
Bible (or other religious tracts) to do that. Some do.
>
> Oh I bet if there was absolute proof they sure could. I mean I would
> certainly believe in God, if I knew for certain that he existed...but
> then I don't presume to know that when I don't even know if I actually
> exist.
Cogito, ergo sum.
>
> > Therefore, mankind, in pride, also exalts himself, ignoring God and the
> > truth.
>
> And so you're like what, the only non-sinner, righteous, d00d on the
> planet?
There are many different levels of pride, some destructive, some
constructive. Wisdom is telling the difference (that's a comment aimed at
both of you).
>
> > > Robert: "Um, I'm just wondering, do you have some sort of direct hot line
> > with God, or is this what Cleo and the magic seeing crystal you bought in
> > the mall are telling you? I'm just sorta curios as to why YOU in particular
> > seem to have ALL the answers and have it ALL figured out as well. Of course
> > then the last guy that I responded to seemed to believe he as speaking the
> > almighty "truth" of the universe as well...hmmm...is anyone besides me
> > seeing a trend here?
>
> > I do have a "hot-line" to God through prayer (me --> God) and the Bible
> > (God --> me). I believe that the Bible, the Word of God, is the truth, and
> > that what God says is Absolute Truth. (The existence of absolute truth is
> > vehemently ignored in the world today.)
Because experience shows us that what we thought was the Absolute Truth
today, isn't tomorrow. That which the religious pundits have claimed to be
the absolute truth often demonstrable isn't (everything revolves around the
earth, for example). Nor can religions founded on the Bible agree on what
the Absolute Truth is, much less other non-Bible based religions. Claiming
you have the Absolute Truth seems to me a matter of pride.
>
> So how does that work? I mean do you just look up at the sky, ask God
> a question, then randomly flip to a page in the bible and start your
> interpretation, or do you have some other method?
I rather imagine the fundamentalists here consider me not particularly on
their side (okay, almost always against them), so I hope you understand when
I start to feel sorry for them, you may be getting unnecessisarily personal.
Bruce
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
| (...) Yeah but then you'd have to have one for everyone's unique interpretation and then it'd just get confusing and messy. (...) Hmmm....no I don't think I'm Catholic today...maybe tomorrow I will be though, we'll see. (...) LOL, now that's funny. (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
| (...) Well that's not what what's his name said, why is he wrong and why is it that you're right? Did he and I just miss some meeting or something? BTW this is your cue to say something about how the meeting was church and the head speaker was God, (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
137 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
