Re: "God", "Our Lady" and the War in the Middle-East

<jafrikayiti@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I asked:
Where does it say that? I'd like you to show it to me.

You answered:
Basing their beliefs on texts like Matthew 1:18, most Christians accept
both the "virgin" status of Mary and the "godly" origin of Jesus. "This
is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was
pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was
found to be with child through the Holy Spirit."

You still have not shown me where it is said that Got has impregnated a
virgin. It simply said that she was found to be with child. Do you
understand that God through his omnicience wills the future and the present
into, and out of existence? Do you understand that God said "Let There Be
Light" and there was light? Do you think that God had to have had sex with
Mary in order for her to become pregnant? You seem to have a problem with
the word omniscience, or you simply feel that he could not be. If that is
the case say it! but don't put words into the Bible.

and other texts like Isaiah 53:1-12 which you quoted are used to claim
that Jesus was at once, son of god and "god" himself....Of course, not
everyone agreed with these interpretations...so the Nicene creed came
into play to force everyone into compliance as we will see below...

Do you think that God cares whether or not you or anyone else agrees with
the interpretations of his writings.

I wrote:
Now, if you do not know the history of how many times a
set of european men sat down and voted on the subject in order to
arrive at this text you call the "word of God".

I wrote:
Would your objections have been more subdue if those men were Africans?

You answered:
In fact some of the early fathers of christianity were black Africans.

What difference does it make? God sees the color of the soul, not the color
of the skin.

I specified "european men" to illustrate the fact that two dominant
features of christianity are eurocentrism and sexism, due to the
historical path taken once Paul took over the jewish sect to which the
followers of Jesus belonged and began transforming it.

So if he went to Africa instead of Rome, it would then make better sense to
you. I'm not even going to address the sexism stuff.

I wrote wrote:
You, like many others before you will see the error of your ways.
Hopefully
for you it will happen before you breathe your last breath. But if it
happens after physical death you're doomed.

You answered:
Jules, honestly, no human beings knows what happens after death. No
more than the catterpillar know in advance that it is destined to
become a butterfly some day. No more than the dog knows it will
transform into a cow.

No faithless human being knows what happens after death. All you have to do
is visit two terminally ill persons waiting to expire, one who is a
christian, one who is not. Then tell me which one is at peace, which one is
tormented.

I wrote:
You're free to think, and to teach that Jesus Christ was a mere man. You
are
deceiving many who believe in the things you say or write. By doing so you
are doing the work of the devil, and you will meet him someday, and you
will
suffer with him.

You answered:
Who told you there was a "devil"? What does it look like? Is he more
dangerous than those human beings dropping bombs on little babies all
over the globe? Who created this "devil"...Is it like Osama Bin Laden,
the work of a "goog guy" that ran wild...?

It is written in the infallible word of God, and I believe it in its
entirety.

The story of the conversion of Constantin, and of everyone else who claims
to be a Christian is only God's business.

Wrong Jules! The story of Constantine IS the story of how christianity
became a religion that outgrew its jewish sect status. It should be the
business of Christians to know their history in order not to fall into
blind and dangerous fanatism when they encounter their fellow human
beings on the planet who happen to have invented other beliefs and
religions whose history differs from their own.

Jesus Christ builds his church, not Constantin.
Matthew 16:15-19 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon
Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And
Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh
and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will
build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I
will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou
shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt
loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

He also foretold that the story of his birth, life, death and resurrection
will be preached in all the world before the end comes.

Matthew 24:11-14 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive
many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. And this
gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto
all nations; and then shall the end come.

I wrote:
God did not create religion. He puts man on this earth, he wrote his word
describing the history of the world from day one, then he sent his son to
die for those who believe in him. The end of the story.

You wrote:
Of course not. Why would a "good" god create something so divisive and
limiting as religion. Some men created religion because they refuse to
admit not to know certain things like how we came to be and what our
ultimate fate is here or elsewhere. A creator god would have no such
hangups.

You obviously did not understand my statement.

I wrote:
Without Jesus you got nothing.

Jules, "having Jesus" is nothing but an expression.
To you thatt's all it will ever be.

People living on
planet earth in 2006 "have Jesus" inasmuch as they can "have
Dessalines", "Have Eistein", "have Martin Luther King", even "Have
Bush" ....it's all about trying to take strength from the cummulative
history. Yeshuah was in all likelihood a great inspirational speaker, a
man of conviction and a wise teacher. Many of the words and actions
ascribed to him in the bible are amazing and valuable. But, there is no
need to try to intimidate people into adopting a dead palestinian hero
for their personal "god", in order to escape an imagined hell or to go
to a so-called heaven once imagined by folks who thought the earth was
flat and covered by a huge blue cover.

Your opinion, you're free to continue to believe in it. You're also free to
continue to preach it, and by doing so you are fufilling the word of God by
leading into captivity those who do not believe, and you will be cast in
outer darkness with them.

This universe which I believe was created (that's the most logical
option as far as I can imagine so far), is filled with beautifuol
mysteries....we do not need to mystify that which is now known.

You mean that it was "self created". When was the last time you saw anything
that created itself?

For instance, that story about adam and eve is ridiculous. There is
positive proof that human beings have been on this planet for millions
of years - not the 10 thousand or so years since the so-called creation
of Adam. And what is this about eve being created from Adam's rib? How
sexist can one get. Why not the most likely situation where the first
human would be the one that is actually able to give birth (i.e. the
female?).

Sounds like you have nothing but questions, and no answers. Why don't you
create some logical answers, since you refute God's version of his creation?

I am not claiming to know which one came first - the man or the woman -
but it seems to me the Adam's rib thing is weak.

Everything is weak if you don't believe.

Okay ! got to go brother. Talk to you soon. I am glad we can speak of
something other than Chimè and GNB. May the Creator continue to bless
you !

Anytime.


.

Loading