Discussion:
Atheism is a Religion
(too old to reply)
IKnowHimDoYou- A.
2005-08-25 15:26:28 UTC
Permalink
Atheism is a Religion

The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion. It is built of
faith; faith that there is no God; faith that the Bible is not truth, and
faith that the atheist is not accountable to God. Only in this great
nation can the atheist wallow in his own belief and be guided by his own
conscience because of our Constitutional 1st Amendment(something that he
would destroy if possible and deny all others).
Pastor Dave
2005-08-25 15:26:48 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:26:28 -0700,
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion.
What recent court ruling?
--
Pastor Dave

http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html

http://tinyurl.com/ce97m

"The mark of a society that's on its last leg, is when
there is no fear of God." - Adrian Rogers

"Theology and ethics are inextricably bound together.
Yet under the supposed banner of unity, we have
harbored enemy ships - as long as they flew our flag.
That policy must change. Tolerating enemies of the
historic Christian faith as though they were our
brethren is not love, but adultery. The substance
of the faith is the only basis for unity."
- The Agony of Deceit, p23
Seppo Pietikainen
2005-08-25 15:36:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pastor Dave
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:26:28 -0700,
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion.
What recent court ruling?
If that isn't a good question, I don't know what is.

Seppo P.
Hugh Betcha
2005-08-25 18:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pastor Dave
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion.
What recent court ruling?
This one:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874

Although I think it has more to do the right of assembly; something
denied to prisoners.... just have your interest declared a religion and
there you go, you can do what you want.
IKnowNothing is taking it out of context, but hey, it's now 'precedent'
so who knows what will happen.

H.
--
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it."
-Claude Arien Helvetius
cactus
2005-08-25 19:57:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hugh Betcha
Post by Pastor Dave
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion.
What recent court ruling?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874
Although I think it has more to do the right of assembly; something
denied to prisoners.... just have your interest declared a religion and
there you go, you can do what you want.
IKnowNothing is taking it out of context, but hey, it's now 'precedent'
so who knows what will happen.
H.
--
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it."
-Claude Arien Helvetius
Interesting. Let's see what the Supremes say. Rather a pity that he had
to hide behind a religious claim to form his study group.

Now that atheism has been declared as a civil religion in that circuit,
maybe we can allow a distinction between civil and religious marriages.
Pastor Dave
2005-08-26 01:35:25 UTC
Permalink
On 25 Aug 2005 11:58:35 -0700, "Hugh Betcha"
Post by Hugh Betcha
Post by Pastor Dave
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion.
What recent court ruling?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874
Although I think it has more to do the right of assembly; something
denied to prisoners.... just have your interest declared a religion and
there you go, you can do what you want.
IKnowNothing is taking it out of context, but hey, it's now 'precedent'
so who knows what will happen.
Well, the court ruled it a religion and no atheist
is going to allow his case to be fought that way,
if he is not fighting for religious freedom.

Thanks for the link. I appreciate it.
--
Pastor Dave

http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html

http://tinyurl.com/ce97m

"The mark of a society that's on its last leg, is when
there is no fear of God." - Adrian Rogers

"Theology and ethics are inextricably bound together.
Yet under the supposed banner of unity, we have
harbored enemy ships - as long as they flew our flag.
That policy must change. Tolerating enemies of the
historic Christian faith as though they were our
brethren is not love, but adultery. The substance
of the faith is the only basis for unity."
- The Agony of Deceit, p23
n***@snet.net
2005-08-26 18:59:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hugh Betcha
Post by Pastor Dave
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion.
What recent court ruling?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874
Although I think it has more to do the right of assembly; something
denied to prisoners.... just have your interest declared a religion and
there you go, you can do what you want.
IKnowNothing is taking it out of context, but hey, it's now 'precedent'
so who knows what will happen.
You're right. If you look at the actual ruling:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/041914p.pdf

It says: The Supreme Court has recognized atheism as _equivalent_ to a
"religion" for purposes of the First Admendment on numerous
occasions,...

The SCOTUS has never declared atheism to be an actual religion. People
like IKnowNothing only pretend that they did.

nafc

Knowledge is Christianity's worst enemy.
Post by Hugh Betcha
H.
--
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your
right to say it."
-Claude Arien Helvetius
IKnowHimDoYou- A.
2005-08-26 14:47:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pastor Dave
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:26:28 -0700,
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion.
What recent court ruling?
--
Pastor Dave
_________________________________________________

Some court back east had a jailbird who wanted to have the same rights as
others who held services in prison. He was apparently denied by the
prison officials so they took it to court and the judge ruled that he
should have his rights because atheism is basd on faith so it qualifies as
a religion.

Sorry I did not record the details from the article...
Muffin
2005-08-28 01:07:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Post by Pastor Dave
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:26:28 -0700,
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion.
What recent court ruling?
--
Pastor Dave
_________________________________________________
Some court back east had a jailbird who wanted to have the same rights as
others who held services in prison. He was apparently denied by the
prison officials so they took it to court and the judge ruled that he
should have his rights because atheism is basd on faith so it qualifies as
a religion.
Sorry I did not record the details from the article...
Clearly you do not understand legal concepts

I notice that when asked to supply details you can't

That goes for everything in your deranged world view

It is all neo fascist prejudice and wishful thinking

Nothing to do with "Christianity" even
cactus
2005-08-25 15:39:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion. It is built of
faith; faith that there is no God; faith that the Bible is not truth, and
faith that the atheist is not accountable to God. Only in this great
nation can the atheist wallow in his own belief and be guided by his own
conscience because of our Constitutional 1st Amendment(something that he
would destroy if possible and deny all others).
Please provide a citation so that we can verify this.
Thore "Tocis" Schmechtig
2005-08-25 16:55:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
Yeah, right. The only religion without anything supernatural, while religion
is defined as belief in (and reverence of) something supernatural.

Aaaah, the idiocy...
--
Regards

Thore "Tocis" Schmechtig
Twonky <host of YHVH Tzva'ot>
2005-08-27 19:27:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
The recent court ruling says that atheism is a religion. It is built of
faith; faith that there is no God; faith that the Bible is not truth, and
faith that the atheist is not accountable to God. Only in this great
nation can the atheist wallow in his own belief and be guided by his own
conscience because of our Constitutional 1st Amendment(something that he
would destroy if possible and deny all others).
"He" being, whom?

Atheism is a religion of one's self. That man is God, and there is none
else. The 'universe' was randomly formed, and we, as a species,
randomly evolved and mutated to our present state of intelligence. With
assertive assumptions, suppositions, guesses, conjecture, abstract and
theoretical ideas.....etc....to help us be evolved.

Nothing concrete. Nothing of fact. That's what an Atheist believes. And
a lot of religions also. A delusion of reality.....

Intelligence doesn't evolve. Nor mutate. It's in the genes of the parents.
And can only learn to its capacity. That's why all of the 'dumbing down'
in the public education system. And the "higher" institutions of learning.
(There ain't no doctors and/or physicists running the border.)

And no genuises being born in low income housing.....

With the limited intelligence we possess. We can get no smarter. Just
more resourceful in our learning process. To learn new things.

Like the following.....

Does an atheist believe the knowledge of good and evil eXist? If so,
pray tell, from where and/or whom, does the knowledge come. We all
harbor it. The schism of the human psyche. Some embrace one, more
than the other. So where did we get such knowledge?

Did it evolve/mutate within us? As we (could have possibly) evolved from
a fish, into what our species is today?

Speaking of intelligence......
Reason and common sense dictate; "One cannot have an Intelligent
Design without an Intelligent Designer!"

No fish, nor primitive Homo sapiens can reason that.

Can you all reason the latter, and the following......

The fact that the Muslims eXist proves the Scriptures true. And
Muslims prove there is the Mighty God in Islam, Allah. Through
the seed of Abram. Hagar. Ishmael. And Mohammad.

The seed of which, an angel of HaShem, multiplied. An angel....who
does no good. An angel of chillul Ha-Shem. Taking the place of
HaShem in having his own manufactured and chosen seed, born
upon the Earth.

Bringing forth princes and principalities...of oil rich nations.....

Rabid Arabs......"Muslims R us"........
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Genesis16.html
(Something of incarnate evil this way came. And dwells. In Islam.)

The fact that the Jews eXist proves the Scriptures true, also. And
they prove there is the Almighty God in Judaism, HaShem. Through
the seed of Abraham. Sarah. And Isaac.

The seed of which, HaShem multiplied. Bringing forth kings and
kingdoms......
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Genesis17.html
(Almighty God this way came. And dwells. In Judaism.)

"Then they remembered that the Almighty God was their rock and
redeemer, and the Most High." (Ps 78:35)

"I will exalt my throne above the throne of God. I will be like the Most
High." (Lucifer. Isaias 12:14)

"Glorify the name of your Lord, the Most High." (Allah 87.1)

A deception on a global generational scale. Circa, in the beginning with
the female virgin HaShem made. (To have His son born in flesh.)

To the birth of Ishmael. To the birth of the Christ. To the birth of
Mohammad (a descendant of Ishmael). To the birth of Islam. Circa
500 A.D.

Ishmael. The wild ass of a man child. "Whose hand will be against all
men. And all men's hand against his. And he will dwell in the face of his
brethren." (Islam)

(I guess Muslims aren't men. They must be, some other kind of man.)

~>
Twonky......
Third in the generation. From the spectacular two dimensions of your TV
and/or monitor. Into your three dimensional world.

But this time. Razing hell. And all organized religion. Starting the domino
effect and affect, with Islam and Allah. Down they go when the truth pushes
them down. . . . ........truthIIIIIII//////////____a cloud of dust....

And then the elite mainstream boneheads....

We are not the only 'intelligent' species in Creation. (We are pretty
frickin pompous to think we are.)

The elohyim....
A reality and hierarchy beyond the understanding of those who deny
and doubt HaShem. Almighty God.

(The war between the angels. Continues on the Earth.)

Message of the chillul Ha-Shem angels; The legion of Lucifer in the
7th Six of the Koran. Satan at his side....<paraphrased>..... "On that
Day weariness did not affect us." Profaning the name, character, and
work, of the Almighty......

After all. There is 24/7 in a week. Not 24/6.......(Subtle, huh?)

What can one eXpect from Allah. The Mighty, Wise, Supreme Being.
Originator (in the conteXt of introduction) and repeater (in the conteXt
of repeating) of the Creation. Who wishes genocide of Israel. And all
infidels. Those who do not kneel before Allah....." Five times a day.......

Message of the kiddush Ha-Shem angels, in the crop markings.
"Yes dear hybrids. There is the Almighty God, HaShem."

Armageddon.......right in our own backyard......
Muffin
2005-08-28 01:16:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Twonky <host of YHVH Tzva'ot>
Atheism is a religion of one's self. That man is God, and there is none
else. The 'universe' was randomly formed, and we, as a species,
randomly evolved and mutated to our present state of intelligence. With
assertive assumptions, suppositions, guesses, conjecture, abstract and
theoretical ideas.....etc....to help us be evolved.
Nothing concrete. Nothing of fact. That's what an Atheist believes. And
a lot of religions also. A delusion of reality.....
Actually both Christianiy and Islam are religions in which the God is an
imagined one and therefore a product of ones own self - under guidance
from "authority"

God might only truly be found by proper study , academic study that
removes theology aand mythology from history and allows the truth to
glimmer through the religious and pious patina of millenia

We might not end up with much - but what we did end up with would at least
be founded on the bedrock of integrity and honesty rather than the sands
of wishful thinking , prejudice, bullying and outright dishonesty.

All with its hands out to fleece the poor in order to sustain their own
intellectual and spiritual imprisonment

And to provide bread and circuses to quell their exciteability.

The Christian circuses and the Muslam Jihads supply the same deliberately
created need

Think about it!


+++++++++++++++


++++++++++++++++
Twonky <host of YHVH Tzva'ot>
2005-08-29 13:49:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Muffin
Post by Twonky <host of YHVH Tzva'ot>
Atheism is a religion of one's self. That man is God, and there is none
else. The 'universe' was randomly formed, and we, as a species,
randomly evolved and mutated to our present state of intelligence. With
assertive assumptions, suppositions, guesses, conjecture, abstract and
theoretical ideas.....etc....to help us be evolved.
Nothing concrete. Nothing of fact. That's what an Atheist believes. And
a lot of religions also. A delusion of reality.....
Actually both Christianiy and Islam are religions in which the God is an
imagined one and therefore a product of ones own self - under guidance
from "authority"
Which affects the entire world, negatively. It's right in your face, Muffin.
You can't deny good and evil eXist. And had a beginning. And no end.

The tree of knowledge. The knowledge of good and evil. They knew
the good. But not the evil.

Muslims come straight from Ishmael. From the Torah to be eXact......
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Genesis16.html
(Something of incarnate evil this way came. And dwells. In Islam.)

Are you denying that?

The Creator is not imaginary. An Intelligent Design. Dictates an Intelligent
Designer. In this case it is Omnipotent.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Genesis17.html
(Almighty God this way came. And dwells. In Judaism.)

Guidance was supposed to be of the Almighty God. But instead it's under
the guidance of man. There are three main players Judaism. Christianity,
and Islam. In that order.

One knows HaShem, Almighty God. But denies His Son as the Messiah.....

One worships a man......

And one worships a Supreme Being.....

And nobody is worshipping the Creator. And He doesn't want to
be worshipped. Never did. Only to be "acknowledged". It was those
He made who wanted to worship. We were taught according to our
own counsel......

(What will be loosed on Earth.......)

HaShem. Maker of the natural. Maker of all life. (There ain't no life
anywhere in Creation without HaShem's sanction.

He made the natural to seed terrestrial planets that evolve naturally
and can be seeded to become a biosphere. "Globes" He calls them.
One on which, He would have His Son born into flesh.
Post by Muffin
God might only truly be found by proper study , academic study that
removes theology aand mythology from history and allows the truth to
glimmer through the religious and pious patina of millenia
If one realizes we are a species of hybrids. Then one can't help
to recognize the only Omnipotence that could orchestrate such an
event. Through genetic engineering. And Psychology of sentient
beings. To get used of dying.
Post by Muffin
We might not end up with much - but what we did end up with would at least
be founded on the bedrock of integrity and honesty rather than the sands
of wishful thinking , prejudice, bullying and outright dishonesty.
As the assertive theories and hypothesis do. Dishonest. And outright
duplicity to delude those who trust in them.
Post by Muffin
All with its hands out to fleece the poor in order to sustain their own
intellectual and spiritual imprisonment
And that crap would cease with a Creator in place. The Intelligent
Designer of the Intelligent Design.
Post by Muffin
And to provide bread and circuses to quell their exciteability.
I know. Look at all the new drugs being pushed on TV. And radio.
For brand new diseases. They are elated.......
Post by Muffin
The Christian circuses and the Muslam Jihads supply the same deliberately
created need
Wrong.

It's a generational deception on mankind. The blind and ignorant toward a
Creator, can't see it.
Post by Muffin
Think about it!
You should. You can't ignore the historical time line.

Do you deny good and evil eXist? And which is more prevalent
on the planet. In whose name.

How were good and evil embedded into the human psyche. A schism
of knowledge.

Good questions all.
Post by Muffin
+++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++
Twonky......
(Hardly ever the same sig twice)

Razing hell, Islam and Allah. All organized religion. And the elite
mainstream boneheads....

Hindsight may 20/20. But it brings forth, 20/20 foresight....

"Then they remembered that the Almighty God was their rock and
redeemer, and the Most High." (Ps 78:35)

"I will exalt my throne above the throne of God. I will be like the Most
High." (Lucifer. Isaias 12:14)

"Glorify the name of your Lord, the Most High." (Allah 87.1)

A deception on a global generational scale. Circa, in the beginning
with the female virgin HaShem made. (To have His Son born in flesh.)

To the birth of Ishmael. To the birth of the Christ. To the birth of
Mohammad (a descendant of Ishmael). To the birth of Islam. Circa
500 A.D.

Ishmael. The wild ass of a man child. "Whose hand will be against all
men. And all men's hand against his. And he will dwell in the face of his
brethren." (Islam)

(I guess Muslims aren't men. They must be, some other kind of man.)

The elohyim....
A reality and hierarchy beyond the understanding of those who deny
and doubt HaShem. Almighty God. And 'those' are the deluded in
assertive theories, illusions, evolution in mutation, as fact...

Armageddon, people living on planet Earth. (You are not the only
'intelligent' species in Creation. You are pretty fuhking pompous to
think you are.)
Muffin
2005-08-28 01:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
NOPE

No it is not. Not without altering the definition of the word "religion"

But then that is what Christians do - they alter the definitions of words like:

belief
loyalty
faith
grace
freedom
spirit
compassion
study

and even "LOVE"
Murf
2005-08-30 10:58:01 UTC
Permalink
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Rob
2005-08-30 15:09:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.

Rob
Joshua Calvert
2005-08-30 16:04:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion -
because a religion is anything a person identifies with apart from
Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
So Xian centric.
cactus
2005-08-30 17:05:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Rob
2005-08-30 17:41:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.

Rob
cactus
2005-08-30 22:39:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
2005-08-31 01:33:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
What do you think? Religion - or not a religion?

Rob
cactus
2005-08-31 03:00:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion. But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.

seems to indicate that you see it differently.

I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Rob
2005-08-31 03:48:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.

Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)

Rob
cactus
2005-08-31 03:54:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross. The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
Rob
2005-08-31 15:33:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.

Rob
cactus
2005-08-31 15:58:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.
Rob
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion, yet lack respect
for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
Rob
2005-08-31 16:49:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.
Rob
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion,
That is a false construct - I don't have a religion.
Post by cactus
yet lack respect
for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
How is that?

Rob
cactus
2005-08-31 18:37:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.
Rob
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion,
That is a false construct - I don't have a religion.
Post by cactus
yet lack respect
for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
How is that?
Rob
You identify with Jesus of Nazareth, how can you not be a Christian?
Rob
2005-08-31 19:44:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.
Rob
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion,
That is a false construct - I don't have a religion.
Post by cactus
yet lack respect
for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
How is that?
Rob
You identify with Jesus of Nazareth, how can you not be a Christian?
So what is your point?

Rob
cactus
2005-09-01 06:55:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.
Rob
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion,
That is a false construct - I don't have a religion.
Post by cactus
yet lack respect
for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
How is that?
You have maintained in the past that there are no Jews based on your
misinterpretation of two minor prophets and your apparently deliberate
ingorance of history. You deny the validity of my religion and then
expect respect for your unique interpretation of your religious belief.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Rob
You identify with Jesus of Nazareth, how can you not be a Christian?
So what is your point?
Rob
My point is that if one believes in Jesus of Nazareth as the messiah,
he/she must be a Christian.
Rob
2005-09-01 15:54:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.
Rob
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion,
That is a false construct - I don't have a religion.
Post by cactus
yet lack respect
for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
How is that?
You have maintained in the past that there are no Jews based on your
misinterpretation of two minor prophets
I have no idea what you are talking about - provide either a quote or a link.
Post by cactus
and your apparently deliberate
ingorance of history.
You deny the validity of my religion
So what? You deny the validity of my belief system.
Post by cactus
and then
expect respect for your unique interpretation of your religious belief.
No - I don't. Because if you really respected what I believe then you would
believe it yourself - but I know you that you cannot believe what I believe
and therefore I do not expect you to.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You identify with Jesus of Nazareth, how can you not be a Christian?
So what is your point?
My point is that if one believes in Jesus of Nazareth as the messiah,
he/she must be a Christian.
Indeed - and I never said otherwise. But being a Christian does not require
one to have a religion. A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a person
must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit eternal life.

Rob
cactus
2005-09-01 17:50:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.
Rob
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion,
That is a false construct - I don't have a religion.
Post by cactus
yet lack respect
for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
How is that?
You have maintained in the past that there are no Jews based on your
misinterpretation of two minor prophets
I have no idea what you are talking about - provide either a quote or a link.
Check the thread "Sects, Usurpers, and Wannabes 1 (History of the
catholics)", which was active from 4/20/2005 to 4/29/2005. Check your
posts on that thread and my responses. You maintained there that there
are no Jews based on invalid interpretations of minor prophets and a
deliberate misunderstanding of history. As I said then, I have never
seen that bizarre theory advanced outside of hate groups.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
and your apparently deliberate
ingorance of history.
You deny the validity of my religion
So what? You deny the validity of my belief system.
No, I don't - I disagree with your idiosyncratic claim not to have a
religion even though you identify with Jesus of Nazareth on the cross.

OTOH I certainly deny the validity of your false assertions regarding my
religion. Even others who participated in that thread regard your view
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
and then
expect respect for your unique interpretation of your religious belief.
No - I don't. Because if you really respected what I believe then you would
believe it yourself - but I know you that you cannot believe what I believe
and therefore I do not expect you to.
Oh, come on. The fact that I do not share your beliefs does not mean I
don't respect them.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You identify with Jesus of Nazareth, how can you not be a Christian?
So what is your point?
My point is that if one believes in Jesus of Nazareth as the messiah,
he/she must be a Christian.
Indeed - and I never said otherwise. But being a Christian does not require
one to have a religion. A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a person
must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit eternal life.
Believing is doing.

And your beliefs drive you to take certain actions, such as expressing
your false beliefs regarding Judasism.
Rob
2005-09-01 18:53:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.
Rob
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion,
That is a false construct - I don't have a religion.
Post by cactus
yet lack respect
for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
How is that?
You have maintained in the past that there are no Jews based on your
misinterpretation of two minor prophets
I have no idea what you are talking about - provide either a quote or a link.
Check the thread "Sects, Usurpers, and Wannabes 1 (History of the
catholics)", which was active from 4/20/2005 to 4/29/2005. Check your
posts on that thread and my responses.
You maintained there that there
are no Jews based on invalid interpretations of minor prophets
Apparently you're referring to my reference regarding Nehemiah - I never said
there were no Jews - so you obviously got me mixed up with someone else.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You deny the validity of my religion
So what? You deny the validity of my belief system.
No, I don't -
Yes - you do - because you deny the valid fact that a person must believe in
Jesus Christ in order to inherit eternal life.
Post by cactus
I disagree with your idiosyncratic claim not to have a
religion
Now you're disrespecting my belief system again - by saying it is idiosyncratic
for me to say I have no religion. But the fact remains - I have no religion.
Post by cactus
even though you identify with Jesus of Nazareth on the cross.
That does not require me to belong to a religion.
Post by cactus
OTOH I certainly deny the validity of your false assertions regarding my
religion. Even others who participated in that thread regard your view
This link doesn't work for me - try google.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
No - I don't. Because if you really respected what I believe then you would
believe it yourself - but I know you that you cannot believe what I believe
and therefore I do not expect you to.
Oh, come on. The fact that I do not share your beliefs does not mean I
don't respect them.
Respect means to admire. So are you telling me that you admire Paul the
apostle's teaching that the only people who are really Jews are those who
believe in Jesus Christ?

Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is one
inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not
literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
My point is that if one believes in Jesus of Nazareth as the messiah,
he/she must be a Christian.
Indeed - and I never said otherwise. But being a Christian does not require
one to have a religion. A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a person
must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit eternal life.
Believing is doing.
The crux of the message of the Gospel is that a person need simply have faith
in Jesus Christ in order to be saved.

Rom 10:5-10 Moses writes about being made right by following the law. He says,
"A person who obeys these things will live because of them." {6} But this is
what the Scripture says about being made right through faith: "Don't say to
yourself, 'Who will go up into heaven?'" (That means, "Who will go up to heaven
and bring Christ down to earth?") {7} "And do not say, 'Who will go down into
the world below?'" (That means, "Who will go down and bring Christ up from the
dead?") {8} This is what the Scripture says: "The word is near you; it is in
your mouth and in your heart." That is the teaching of faith that we are
telling. {9} If you use your mouth to say, "Jesus is Lord," and if you believe
in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, you will be saved. {10} We
believe with our hearts, and so we are made right with God. And we use our
mouths to say that we believe, and so we are saved. (NCV)

Having faith in Christ is doing nothing except to simply believe - and simply
believing does not require belonging to a religion.

Rob
cactus
2005-09-02 00:54:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a
hobby
Atheism is not a religion - but all atheists practice a religion - because a
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus Christ's death
on the Cross.
Rob
What is Christianity then?
Identification with Jesus Christ's death on the Cross.
Rob
So it's not a religion then?
Rob
I think that Christianity is a religion.
If you think you can - explain how identifying with Christ's death on the Cross
is a religion?
Post by cactus
But then your definition
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
religion is anything a person identifies with apart from Jesus
Christ's death >>>>>on the Cross.
seems to indicate that you see it differently.
I've given you my opinion. > What do you think? Religion - or not a
religion?
Those who see themselves as having died with Christ on the Cross is the crux
of Christianity - and to see oneself as having died with Christ on the Cross is
a perception - not a religion.
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Rob
Interesting.
But
Christianity is not the perception of having died with Jesus on the
cross.
Not to the pagan world - but it is to Christians. Moreover - there are numerous
scriptures in the New Testament that speak of having died with Christ or being
dead with Christ - and Christ's death on the Cross is the foundation upon which
the Christian Church is built.
Post by cactus
The perception may well underlie the religion. So it seems to me
that it would be a religion, with its various rules, divine worship etc.
You're not talking about Christianity here - but a counterfeit-Christianity.
Rob
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion,
That is a false construct - I don't have a religion.
Post by cactus
yet lack respect
for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
How is that?
You have maintained in the past that there are no Jews based on your
misinterpretation of two minor prophets
I have no idea what you are talking about - provide either a quote or a link.
Check the thread "Sects, Usurpers, and Wannabes 1 (History of the
catholics)", which was active from 4/20/2005 to 4/29/2005. Check your
posts on that thread and my responses.
You maintained there that there
are no Jews based on invalid interpretations of minor prophets
Apparently you're referring to my reference regarding Nehemiah - I never said
there were no Jews - so you obviously got me mixed up with someone else.
No I don't. Here's the posting in its entirety. It is part of a thread
in which you repeat the point continuously:
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Neh 7:5-6 So my God gave me the idea to call
together all the leaders of the
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
city, along with the ordinary citizens, for
registration. I had found the
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
genealogical record of those who had first
returned to Judah. This is what was
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
written there: {6} "Here is the list of the
Jewish exiles of the provinces who
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
returned from their captivity to Jerusalem and
to the other towns of Judah.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
They had been deported to Babylon by King
Nebuchadnezzar. (NLT)
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Right. He was rebuilding the place.
It says nothing here about who was Jewish,
Are you blind? Nehemiah makes a direct reference to who is Jewish in v.
6 when
he says "Here is the list of the Jewish exiles".
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
only where they were from. Nothing about who was and who wasn't.
Genealogy, then as now, is important to the Jews. I know of at least
one who can trace her ancestry back to Aaron the Kohen Gadol (High
Priest) with documentary evidence.
Unless it can be traced back to Old Testament records it proves nothing.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Neh 7:61 "Another group returned to Jerusalem
at this time from the towns of
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
Tel-melah, Tel-harsha, Kerub, Addan, and Immer.
However, they could not prove
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
that they or their families were descendants of
Israel. (NLT)
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
That is simply a statement. Nothing appears to have been done one way
__________________________________________________________________________
64 These who traced their genealogy sought their records, but they were
not found, and they were disqualified from the priesthood.
===========================================================================
Note that they were not excluded as Jews, but had to wait for a Priest
We've been over this before - to be allowed to participate in Jewish
services
is zero proof they were Jews. So you have no argument here.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
__________________________________________________________________________
65 And Hattirshatha said to them that they should not eat of the most
holy sacrifices until a priest arises for the Urim and the Tummim.
===========================================================================
And note further that they were still included in among the Jews who had
__________________________________________________________________________
66 The entire congregation together was forty-two thousand three hundred
and sixty.
===========================================================================
Ezra 2 is exactly the same, at least in my translation (Davka)
Plenty of others who converted to Judaism, such as Khazars in Medieval
times, would have kept their own records and can therefore trace their
Jewishness to the time of their conversions.
Also there was already a Jewish diaspora in Roman times. Jews lived in
Egypt and all around Roman Europe. Their records would have been kept
by the individual families.
Your point is moot - whatever records individual families possessed
still had
to be checked by the priests and verified based on the temple records.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
As the above verses make clear - Nehemiah
didn't take anyone's word as proof
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
they were a Jew - but he took the genealogical
records as proof - of which you
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by Murf
concede you have none.
No, that applied to being priests.
It didn't apply just to the priesthood - but it also applied to Jewish
exiles
who were ordinary citizens as Nehemiah 7:5-6 makes clear:

Neh 7:5-6 So my God gave me the idea to call together all the leaders of the
city, along with the ordinary citizens, for registration. I had found the
genealogical record of those who had first returned to Judah. This is
what was
written there: {6} "Here is the list of the Jewish exiles of the
provinces who
returned from their captivity to Jerusalem and to the other towns of Judah.
They had been deported to Babylon by King Nebuchadnezzar. (NLT)
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
In any case it is clear that these texts do not support your argument
that genealogies are necessary.
On the contrary - these texts are irrefutable proof that genealogies are
necessary - and your dissent merely amounts to frivolous carping.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
This is an argument advanced by
hatemongers and fanatical missionaries.
It is an argument advanced by Nehemiah - so you're calling him
a hatemonger - not me.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Given your behavior and your cowardly unwillingness to reveal either
your sources or your affiliations,
Nehemiah 7:5-6 is the only source I need - as this passage is proof positive
that those who returned to Judah following the Babylonian exile were Jews
based on their genealogical records.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I can only assume the worst. Maybe
you are an IKHDY alter ego? Or Pastor Dave? Or are you merely a
skinhead Identity Church adherent?
Now that your argument has been utterly decimated - you resort to more
childish taunts - which only succeeds in proving how weak and lame your
argument really is. Thank you for that.

Rob
______________________________________________________________________________________________

I could also provide you with the text of the posting that calls your
position ridiculous.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You deny the validity of my religion
So what? You deny the validity of my belief system.
No, I don't -
Yes - you do - because you deny the valid fact that a person must believe in
Jesus Christ in order to inherit eternal life.
No I don't. It's neither part of my religion nor my personal belief. It
doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, or vice versa.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I disagree with your idiosyncratic claim not to have a
religion
Now you're disrespecting my belief system again - by saying it is idiosyncratic
for me to say I have no religion. But the fact remains - I have no religion.
I think it idiosyncratic that you claim Christian belief yet maintain
that you do not have a religion. I have never encountered that anywhere
before, so AFAIK it is unique.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
even though you identify with Jesus of Nazareth on the cross.
That does not require me to belong to a religion.
It is an identification unique to Christianity AFAIK. If that isn't the
case, please explain.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
OTOH I certainly deny the validity of your false assertions regarding my
religion. Even others who participated in that thread regard your view
This link doesn't work for me - try google.
Here you are:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:08:43 -0400, "Doc: The absent-minded-professor!"
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Rob
So are you also saying that the Orthodox Jewish faith doesn't exist?
Labels don't prove anything.
Rob
Rob, this argument is ridiculous!
Sure, labels may not mean much. But the Jewish faith DOES exist.
So does the Baptist faith; so does the Pentecostal, the United, the
Methodist, the Quaker, etc................
Are you saying that all these are false or non-existent too?
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
No - I don't. Because if you really respected what I believe then you would
believe it yourself - but I know you that you cannot believe what I believe
and therefore I do not expect you to.
Oh, come on. The fact that I do not share your beliefs does not mean I
don't respect them.
Respect means to admire. So are you telling me that you admire Paul the
apostle's teaching that the only people who are really Jews are those who
believe in Jesus Christ?
This from Webster.com
___________________________________________________________________________________
Main Entry: 1re·spect
Pronunciation: ri-'spekt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin respectus, literally, act of
looking back, from respicere to look back, regard, from re- + specere to
look -- more at SPY
1 : a relation or reference to a particular thing or situation <remarks
having respect to an earlier plan>
2 : an act of giving particular attention : CONSIDERATION
3 a : high or special regard : ESTEEM b : the quality or state of being
esteemed c plural : expressions of respect or deference <paid our respects>
4 : PARTICULAR, DETAIL <a good plan in some respects>
- in respect of chiefly British : with respect to : CONCERNING
- in respect to : with respect to : CONCERNING
- with respect to : with reference to : in relation to
___________________________________________________________________________________

Note definition 2. That's my use of the term.

But certainly not 3 (which is yours here), as regards Paul. He was the
second of the great Jewish apostates. And his teaching that the only
Jews are the ones who followed Jesus is preposterous. It's like saying
the only way to be an honest person is to tell lies.
Post by Rob
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is one
inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not
literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
My point is that if one believes in Jesus of Nazareth as the messiah,
he/she must be a Christian.
Indeed - and I never said otherwise. But being a Christian does not require
one to have a religion. A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a person
must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit eternal life.
Believing is doing.
The crux of the message of the Gospel is that a person need simply have faith
in Jesus Christ in order to be saved.
Rom 10:5-10 Moses writes about being made right by following the law. He says,
"A person who obeys these things will live because of them." {6} But this is
what the Scripture says about being made right through faith: "Don't say to
yourself, 'Who will go up into heaven?'" (That means, "Who will go up to heaven
and bring Christ down to earth?") {7} "And do not say, 'Who will go down into
the world below?'" (That means, "Who will go down and bring Christ up from the
dead?") {8} This is what the Scripture says: "The word is near you; it is in
your mouth and in your heart." That is the teaching of faith that we are
telling. {9} If you use your mouth to say, "Jesus is Lord," and if you believe
in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, you will be saved. {10} We
believe with our hearts, and so we are made right with God. And we use our
mouths to say that we believe, and so we are saved. (NCV)
Having faith in Christ is doing nothing except to simply believe - and simply
believing does not require belonging to a religion.
Having faith is action, believing is action. In any case your beliefs
drive you to say some mighty peculiar things and who knows what actions.
Rob
2005-09-02 04:41:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Apparently you're referring to my reference regarding Nehemiah - I never said
there were no Jews - so you obviously got me mixed up with someone else.
No I don't. Here's the posting in its entirety. It is part of a thread
<snip>
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
It says nothing here about who was Jewish,
The following was your full quote in response to my quote of Neh 7:5-6:

QUOTE:
Right. He was rebuilding the place. It says nothing here about who was
Jewish, only where they were from. Nothing about who was and who wasn't.
Genealogy, then as now, is important to the Jews. I know of at least
one who can trace her ancestry back to Aaron the Kohen Gadol (High
Priest) with documentary evidence.
UNQUOTE:

I responded to your above claim that Nehemiah says nothing about who
was Jewish with the following:

QUOTE:
Are you blind? Nehemiah makes a direct reference to who is Jewish in v. 6 when
he says "Here is the list of the Jewish exiles".
UNQUOTE:

Anyone who is not brain dead can clearly see from my above quote that I am
not arguing that there are "no Jews" - but that there "are Jews".
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Yes - you do - because you deny the valid fact that a person must believe in
Jesus Christ in order to inherit eternal life.
No I don't. It's neither part of my religion nor my personal belief. It
doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, or vice versa.
You're being absurd - you either accept my belief as being a valid belief - or
you do not - and you do not.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I disagree with your idiosyncratic claim not to have a
religion
Now you're disrespecting my belief system again - by saying it is idiosyncratic
for me to say I have no religion. But the fact remains - I have no religion.
I think it idiosyncratic that you claim Christian belief yet maintain
that you do not have a religion. I have never encountered that anywhere
before, so AFAIK it is unique.
Where does it say anywhere in the NT that a person must belong to a religion
in order to be a Christian? HINT: It doesn't.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
even though you identify with Jesus of Nazareth on the cross.
That does not require me to belong to a religion.
It is an identification unique to Christianity AFAIK. If that isn't the
case, please explain.
As I already stated in this thread - to identify with Christ is nothing more
nor less than to simply see oneself as having died with Christ - and that
does not require belonging to any religion.

Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
OTOH I certainly deny the validity of your false assertions regarding my
religion. Even others who participated in that thread regard your view
This link doesn't work for me - try google.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:08:43 -0400, "Doc: The absent-minded-professor!"
Post by cactus
Rob
So are you also saying that the Orthodox Jewish faith doesn't exist?
Labels don't prove anything.
Rob
Rob, this argument is ridiculous!
Sure, labels may not mean much.
But the Jewish faith DOES exist.
I agree the Jewish faith exists - and I agree there are Jews - but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.

Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is one
inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not
literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
Post by cactus
So does the Baptist faith; so does the Pentecostal, the United, the
Methodist, the Quaker, etc................
This is a semantical argument - but the only real faith is faith in God - which
is faith in Jesus Christ.

<snip>
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Respect means to admire. So are you telling me that you admire Paul the
apostle's teaching that the only people who are really Jews are those who
believe in Jesus Christ?
This from Webster.com
___________________________________________________________________________________
Main Entry: 1re·spect
Pronunciation: ri-'spekt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin respectus, literally, act of
looking back, from respicere to look back, regard, from re- + specere to
look -- more at SPY
1 : a relation or reference to a particular thing or situation <remarks
having respect to an earlier plan>
2 : an act of giving particular attention : CONSIDERATION
3 a : high or special regard : ESTEEM b : the quality or state of being
esteemed c plural : expressions of respect or deference <paid our respects>
4 : PARTICULAR, DETAIL <a good plan in some respects>
- in respect of chiefly British : with respect to : CONCERNING
- in respect to : with respect to : CONCERNING
- with respect to : with reference to : in relation to
___________________________________________________________________________________
Note definition 2. That's my use of the term.
I'll take that one too - which proves your accusation against me is false. Nice
going - you just shot yourself in the foot.
Post by cactus
But certainly not 3 (which is yours here), as regards Paul. He was the
second of the great Jewish apostates.
And his teaching that the only
Jews are the ones who followed Jesus is preposterous.
Preposterous to you - but not preposterous to those who are Jews.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
The crux of the message of the Gospel is that a person need simply have faith
in Jesus Christ in order to be saved.
Rom 10:5-10 Moses writes about being made right by following the law. He says,
"A person who obeys these things will live because of them." {6} But this is
what the Scripture says about being made right through faith: "Don't say to
yourself, 'Who will go up into heaven?'" (That means, "Who will go up to heaven
and bring Christ down to earth?") {7} "And do not say, 'Who will go down into
the world below?'" (That means, "Who will go down and bring Christ up from the
dead?") {8} This is what the Scripture says: "The word is near you; it is in
your mouth and in your heart." That is the teaching of faith that we are
telling. {9} If you use your mouth to say, "Jesus is Lord," and if you believe
in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, you will be saved. {10} We
believe with our hearts, and so we are made right with God. And we use our
mouths to say that we believe, and so we are saved. (NCV)
Having faith in Christ is doing nothing except to simply believe - and simply
believing does not require belonging to a religion.
Having faith is action, believing is action.
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an action - but
it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with uplifted hands to
receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven - whereas believing is
the action of eating that Bread of Life.

John 6:35 Jesus replied, "I am the bread of life. No one who comes to me will
ever be hungry again. Those who believe in me will never thirst. (NLT)
Post by cactus
In any case your beliefs
drive you to say some mighty peculiar things and who knows what actions.
The Gospel is peculiar to those who reject it because they see it as being
foolish. Conversely - the Gospel is peculiar to those who accept it because
they see it as the power of God.

1 Cor 1:18 I know very well how foolish the message of the cross sounds to
those who are on the road to destruction. But we who are being saved recognize
this message as the very power of God. (NLT)

Rob
cactus
2005-09-02 07:35:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Apparently you're referring to my reference regarding Nehemiah - I never said
there were no Jews - so you obviously got me mixed up with someone else.
No I don't. Here's the posting in its entirety. It is part of a thread
<snip>
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
It says nothing here about who was Jewish,
Right. He was rebuilding the place. It says nothing here about who was
Jewish, only where they were from. Nothing about who was and who wasn't.
Genealogy, then as now, is important to the Jews. I know of at least
one who can trace her ancestry back to Aaron the Kohen Gadol (High
Priest) with documentary evidence.
I responded to your above claim that Nehemiah says nothing about who
Are you blind? Nehemiah makes a direct reference to who is Jewish in v. 6 when
he says "Here is the list of the Jewish exiles".
Anyone who is not brain dead can clearly see from my above quote that I am
not arguing that there are "no Jews" - but that there "are Jews".
But elsewhere you use the oxymoronic definition that the only Jews today
are the ones that became apostates to worship Jesus of Nazareth. And
you also make the statement that no one is a Jew who can't prove their
ancestry going back at least to Second Temple times.

Like many of your religion you define Jews to suit your spiritual
convenience rather than reality.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Yes - you do - because you deny the valid fact that a person must believe in
Jesus Christ in order to inherit eternal life.
No I don't. It's neither part of my religion nor my personal belief. It
doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, or vice versa.
You're being absurd - you either accept my belief as being a valid belief - or
you do not - and you do not.
I accept your belief as being valid for you, and maybe perhaps for other
Christians, but not for anyone who is not a Christian.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I disagree with your idiosyncratic claim not to have a
religion
Now you're disrespecting my belief system again - by saying it is idiosyncratic
for me to say I have no religion. But the fact remains - I have no religion.
I think it idiosyncratic that you claim Christian belief yet maintain
that you do not have a religion. I have never encountered that anywhere
before, so AFAIK it is unique.
Where does it say anywhere in the NT that a person must belong to a religion
in order to be a Christian? HINT: It doesn't.
That's nonsense. Believing in whatever it is that Jesus of Nazareth
offers means that the believer is a Christian. Why do you try to avoid
this so much? What's wrong with being part of a religion?
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
even though you identify with Jesus of Nazareth on the cross.
That does not require me to belong to a religion.
It is an identification unique to Christianity AFAIK. If that isn't the
case, please explain.
As I already stated in this thread - to identify with Christ is nothing more
nor less than to simply see oneself as having died with Christ - and that
does not require belonging to any religion.
We'll have to disagree on this one. I think that it makes you a
Christian, ie a member of that religion.
Post by Rob
Rom 6:3 Or have you forgotten that when we became Christians and were baptized
to become one with Christ Jesus, we died with him? (NLT)
Maybe you did. As the saying goes, "The people Israel live."
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
OTOH I certainly deny the validity of your false assertions regarding my
religion. Even others who participated in that thread regard your view
This link doesn't work for me - try google.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:08:43 -0400, "Doc: The absent-minded-professor!"
Post by cactus
Rob
So are you also saying that the Orthodox Jewish faith doesn't exist?
Labels don't prove anything.
Rob
Rob, this argument is ridiculous!
Sure, labels may not mean much.
But the Jewish faith DOES exist.
I agree the Jewish faith exists - and I agree there are Jews - but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is one
inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not
literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This is not part of the Jewish canon, any more than the Holy Koran or
the Upanishads. And your Pauline here says that one has to be sincere in
one's belief to be Jewish. Actually belief is not a requirement of
Judaism - only following the mitzvot. But sincerity and belief help.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
So does the Baptist faith; so does the Pentecostal, the United, the
Methodist, the Quaker, etc................
This is a semantical argument - but the only real faith is faith in God - which
is faith in Jesus Christ.
<snip>
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Respect means to admire. So are you telling me that you admire Paul the
apostle's teaching that the only people who are really Jews are those who
believe in Jesus Christ?
This from Webster.com
___________________________________________________________________________________
Main Entry: 1re·spect
Pronunciation: ri-'spekt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin respectus, literally, act of
looking back, from respicere to look back, regard, from re- + specere to
look -- more at SPY
1 : a relation or reference to a particular thing or situation <remarks
having respect to an earlier plan>
2 : an act of giving particular attention : CONSIDERATION
3 a : high or special regard : ESTEEM b : the quality or state of being
esteemed c plural : expressions of respect or deference <paid our respects>
4 : PARTICULAR, DETAIL <a good plan in some respects>
- in respect of chiefly British : with respect to : CONCERNING
- in respect to : with respect to : CONCERNING
- with respect to : with reference to : in relation to
___________________________________________________________________________________
Note definition 2. That's my use of the term.
I'll take that one too - which proves your accusation against me is false. Nice
going - you just shot yourself in the foot.
I don't understand this because you accused me of admiring Paul the
apostle, which I do not. I only said that I considered what he said,
meaning that I gave it attention rather than dismissing it out of hand.
No gun, no shot.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
But certainly not 3 (which is yours here), as regards Paul. He was the
second of the great Jewish apostates.
And his teaching that the only
Jews are the ones who followed Jesus is preposterous.
Preposterous to you - but not preposterous to those who are Jews.
You accept Paul's polemical definition of what he wants Jews to be. Of
course that's what he wants because he's trying to start a new religion
by poaching Jews from the community.

You're back to your old tricks of denying the existence of modern Jewry
any way you can. We've got two methods now: first the false notion that
geneological records were ever stored in the Temple, and now Paul's
oxymoronic definition.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
The crux of the message of the Gospel is that a person need simply have faith
in Jesus Christ in order to be saved.
Rom 10:5-10 Moses writes about being made right by following the law. He says,
"A person who obeys these things will live because of them." {6} But this is
what the Scripture says about being made right through faith: "Don't say to
yourself, 'Who will go up into heaven?'" (That means, "Who will go up to heaven
and bring Christ down to earth?") {7} "And do not say, 'Who will go down into
the world below?'" (That means, "Who will go down and bring Christ up from the
dead?") {8} This is what the Scripture says: "The word is near you; it is in
your mouth and in your heart." That is the teaching of faith that we are
telling. {9} If you use your mouth to say, "Jesus is Lord," and if you believe
in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, you will be saved. {10} We
believe with our hearts, and so we are made right with God. And we use our
mouths to say that we believe, and so we are saved. (NCV)
Having faith in Christ is doing nothing except to simply believe - and simply
believing does not require belonging to a religion.
Having faith is action, believing is action.
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an action - but
it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with uplifted hands to
receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven - whereas believing is
the action of eating that Bread of Life.
Begging is action. Supplication is action.
Post by Rob
John 6:35 Jesus replied, "I am the bread of life. No one who comes to me will
ever be hungry again. Those who believe in me will never thirst. (NLT)
Post by cactus
In any case your beliefs
drive you to say some mighty peculiar things and who knows what actions.
The Gospel is peculiar to those who reject it because they see it as being
foolish. Conversely - the Gospel is peculiar to those who accept it because
they see it as the power of God.
I don't see your gospel as being "foolish." It's simply not mine, any
more than the Holy Koran.
Post by Rob
1 Cor 1:18 I know very well how foolish the message of the cross sounds to
those who are on the road to destruction. But we who are being saved recognize
this message as the very power of God. (NLT)
Rob
2005-09-02 15:58:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Apparently you're referring to my reference regarding Nehemiah - I never said
there were no Jews - so you obviously got me mixed up with someone else.
No I don't. Here's the posting in its entirety. It is part of a thread
<snip>
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
It says nothing here about who was Jewish,
Right. He was rebuilding the place. It says nothing here about who was
Jewish, only where they were from. Nothing about who was and who wasn't.
Genealogy, then as now, is important to the Jews. I know of at least
one who can trace her ancestry back to Aaron the Kohen Gadol (High
Priest) with documentary evidence.
I responded to your above claim that Nehemiah says nothing about who
Are you blind? Nehemiah makes a direct reference to who is Jewish in v. 6 when
he says "Here is the list of the Jewish exiles".
Anyone who is not brain dead can clearly see from my above quote that I am
not arguing that there are "no Jews" - but that there "are Jews".
But elsewhere you use the oxymoronic definition that the only Jews today
are the ones that became apostates to worship Jesus of Nazareth.
That's your definition - not mine.
Post by cactus
And
you also make the statement that no one is a Jew who can't prove their
ancestry going back at least to Second Temple times.
Jews who are living today can prove it - but you can't prove it by your own
admission.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
No I don't. It's neither part of my religion nor my personal belief. It
doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, or vice versa.
You're being absurd - you either accept my belief as being a valid belief - or
you do not - and you do not.
I accept your belief as being valid for you, and maybe perhaps for other
Christians,
but not for anyone who is not a Christian.
Which means you reject it - like I already said.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I think it idiosyncratic that you claim Christian belief yet maintain
that you do not have a religion. I have never encountered that anywhere
before, so AFAIK it is unique.
Where does it say anywhere in the NT that a person must belong to a religion
in order to be a Christian? HINT: It doesn't.
That's nonsense. Believing in whatever it is that Jesus of Nazareth
offers means that the believer is a Christian. Why do you try to avoid
this so much? What's wrong with being part of a religion?
A person BELIEVES the Gospel - whereas a person JOINS a religion. The
commandment from Jesus is to follow Him - but nowhere does Jesus give
the command to join a religion. And as I've said before - the Gospel is the
antithesis of religion.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Rob, this argument is ridiculous!
Sure, labels may not mean much.
But the Jewish faith DOES exist.
I agree the Jewish faith exists - and I agree there are Jews - but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is one
inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not
literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This is not part of the Jewish canon,
It is part of the Jewish canon to those who are real Jews - and real Jews are
the ones Paul the apostle describes in the above verses. Paul would consider
you a Gentile - and so do I.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Respect means to admire. So are you telling me that you admire Paul the
apostle's teaching that the only people who are really Jews are those who
believe in Jesus Christ?
This from Webster.com
___________________________________________________________________________________
Main Entry: 1re·spect
Pronunciation: ri-'spekt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin respectus, literally, act of
looking back, from respicere to look back, regard, from re- + specere to
look -- more at SPY
1 : a relation or reference to a particular thing or situation <remarks
having respect to an earlier plan>
2 : an act of giving particular attention : CONSIDERATION
3 a : high or special regard : ESTEEM b : the quality or state of being
esteemed c plural : expressions of respect or deference <paid our respects>
4 : PARTICULAR, DETAIL <a good plan in some respects>
- in respect of chiefly British : with respect to : CONCERNING
- in respect to : with respect to : CONCERNING
- with respect to : with reference to : in relation to
___________________________________________________________________________________
Note definition 2. That's my use of the term.
I'll take that one too - which proves your accusation against me is false. Nice
going - you just shot yourself in the foot.
I don't understand this because you accused me of admiring Paul the
apostle,
I asked you a question. Do you know what a question is?

REPOST:
So are you telling me that you admire Paul the apostle's teaching that the
only people who are really Jews are those who believe in Jesus Christ?
Post by cactus
which I do not.
No duh.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
But certainly not 3 (which is yours here), as regards Paul. He was the
second of the great Jewish apostates.
And his teaching that the only
Jews are the ones who followed Jesus is preposterous.
Preposterous to you - but not preposterous to those who are Jews.
You accept Paul's polemical definition of what he wants Jews to be. Of
course that's what he wants because he's trying to start a new religion
by poaching Jews from the community.
Your above statement proves your woeful ignorance of Christian doctrine - and
that is all it proves.
Post by cactus
You're back to your old tricks of denying the existence of modern Jewry
any way you can.
I don't deny the existence of modern Jews - as modern Jews are just as Paul
describes in Romans 2:28-29 quoted above.
Post by cactus
We've got two methods now: first the false notion that
geneological records were ever stored in the Temple,
It doesn't matter where they were stored. Do they exist today?
Post by cactus
and now Paul's oxymoronic definition.
You're misusing the word "oxymoronic" - there is nothing that Paul writes that
demonstrates he is being oxymoronic - I suggest you look up the term.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
The crux of the message of the Gospel is that a person need simply have faith
in Jesus Christ in order to be saved.
Rom 10:5-10 Moses writes about being made right by following the law. He says,
"A person who obeys these things will live because of them." {6} But this is
what the Scripture says about being made right through faith: "Don't say to
yourself, 'Who will go up into heaven?'" (That means, "Who will go up to heaven
and bring Christ down to earth?") {7} "And do not say, 'Who will go down into
the world below?'" (That means, "Who will go down and bring Christ up from the
dead?") {8} This is what the Scripture says: "The word is near you; it is in
your mouth and in your heart." That is the teaching of faith that we are
telling. {9} If you use your mouth to say, "Jesus is Lord," and if you believe
in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, you will be saved. {10} We
believe with our hearts, and so we are made right with God. And we use our
mouths to say that we believe, and so we are saved. (NCV)
Having faith in Christ is doing nothing except to simply believe - and simply
believing does not require belonging to a religion.
Having faith is action, believing is action.
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an action - but
it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with uplifted hands to
receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven - whereas believing is
the action of eating that Bread of Life.
Begging is action.
I have seen beggars sitting on the sidewalk with a cup resting on the sidewalk
beside them - these beggars were "doing nothing" except receiving the coins
that were dropped in their cups. Receiving something for "doing nothing" is not
an action - and Paul delineates this premise as it relates to the Gospel.

Eph 2:8-9 I mean that you have been saved by grace through believing. You did
not save yourselves; it was a gift from God. {9} It was not the result of your
own efforts, so you cannot brag about it. (NCV)
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
In any case your beliefs
drive you to say some mighty peculiar things and who knows what actions.
The Gospel is peculiar to those who reject it because they see it as being
foolish. Conversely - the Gospel is peculiar to those who accept it because
they see it as the power of God.
I don't see your gospel as being "foolish."
You already dismissed Paul's definition of a Jew as nonsense - so you do indeed
see the Gospel as being foolish.

1 Cor 1:18 I know very well how foolish the message of the cross sounds to
those who are on the road to destruction. But we who are being saved recognize
this message as the very power of God. (NLT)

Rob
cactus
2005-09-02 17:38:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Apparently you're referring to my reference regarding Nehemiah - I never said
there were no Jews - so you obviously got me mixed up with someone else.
No I don't. Here's the posting in its entirety. It is part of a thread
<snip>
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
It says nothing here about who was Jewish,
Right. He was rebuilding the place. It says nothing here about who was
Jewish, only where they were from. Nothing about who was and who wasn't.
Genealogy, then as now, is important to the Jews. I know of at least
one who can trace her ancestry back to Aaron the Kohen Gadol (High
Priest) with documentary evidence.
I responded to your above claim that Nehemiah says nothing about who
Are you blind? Nehemiah makes a direct reference to who is Jewish in v. 6 when
he says "Here is the list of the Jewish exiles".
Anyone who is not brain dead can clearly see from my above quote that I am
not arguing that there are "no Jews" - but that there "are Jews".
But elsewhere you use the oxymoronic definition that the only Jews today
are the ones that became apostates to worship Jesus of Nazareth.
That's your definition - not mine.
Post by cactus
And
you also make the statement that no one is a Jew who can't prove their
ancestry going back at least to Second Temple times.
Jews who are living today can prove it - but you can't prove it by your own
admission.
You just define "Jews" as those who meet your criteria. I can't stop you
from doing so, even though it is totally wrong.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
No I don't. It's neither part of my religion nor my personal belief. It
doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, or vice versa.
You're being absurd - you either accept my belief as being a valid belief - or
you do not - and you do not.
I accept your belief as being valid for you, and maybe perhaps for other
Christians,
but not for anyone who is not a Christian.
Which means you reject it - like I already said.
No I don't: I can't reject Christianity because I never accepted it in
the first place. It has about as much place in my spirituality as
Santeria or Shinto.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I think it idiosyncratic that you claim Christian belief yet maintain
that you do not have a religion. I have never encountered that anywhere
before, so AFAIK it is unique.
Where does it say anywhere in the NT that a person must belong to a religion
in order to be a Christian? HINT: It doesn't.
That's nonsense. Believing in whatever it is that Jesus of Nazareth
offers means that the believer is a Christian. Why do you try to avoid
this so much? What's wrong with being part of a religion?
A person BELIEVES the Gospel - whereas a person JOINS a religion. The
commandment from Jesus is to follow Him - but nowhere does Jesus give
the command to join a religion. And as I've said before - the Gospel is the
antithesis of religion.
Believing is taking action, which means that a believer becomes a member
of the religion, at least for Christianity. It does not necessarily
apply to Judaism, which requires action, but not belief.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Rob, this argument is ridiculous!
Sure, labels may not mean much.
But the Jewish faith DOES exist.
I agree the Jewish faith exists - and I agree there are Jews - but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is one
inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not
literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This is not part of the Jewish canon,
It is part of the Jewish canon to those who are real Jews
Your "real Jews" are apostates or invalid converts. They can't
participate in Jewish services from the pulpit, their children are not
considered Jews unless they convert, and they cannot be buried in a
Jewish cemetary. Real Jews cannot pray with them because their liturgy
contains references to Jesus of Nazareth.


- and real Jews are
Post by Rob
the ones Paul the apostle describes in the above verses. Paul would consider
you a Gentile - and so do I.
I consider Paul to be an apostate from Judaism. He defines Jews as
people like him. Can't blame him for that, only for oxymoronica. Doesn't
it bother you that you believe literally in a contradiction?
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Respect means to admire. So are you telling me that you admire Paul the
apostle's teaching that the only people who are really Jews are those who
believe in Jesus Christ?
This from Webster.com
___________________________________________________________________________________
Main Entry: 1re·spect
Pronunciation: ri-'spekt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin respectus, literally, act of
looking back, from respicere to look back, regard, from re- + specere to
look -- more at SPY
1 : a relation or reference to a particular thing or situation <remarks
having respect to an earlier plan>
2 : an act of giving particular attention : CONSIDERATION
3 a : high or special regard : ESTEEM b : the quality or state of being
esteemed c plural : expressions of respect or deference <paid our respects>
4 : PARTICULAR, DETAIL <a good plan in some respects>
- in respect of chiefly British : with respect to : CONCERNING
- in respect to : with respect to : CONCERNING
- with respect to : with reference to : in relation to
___________________________________________________________________________________
Note definition 2. That's my use of the term.
I'll take that one too - which proves your accusation against me is false. Nice
going - you just shot yourself in the foot.
I don't understand this because you accused me of admiring Paul the
apostle,
I asked you a question. Do you know what a question is?
What's a question?
Post by Rob
So are you telling me that you admire Paul the apostle's teaching that the
only people who are really Jews are those who believe in Jesus Christ?
No I do not admire Paul for that at all. He was deadly wrong. But he's
not the only one to create contradicitions for sectarian ends. I
consider him to be right up there with V. Lenin, who did exactly the
same thing.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
which I do not.
No duh.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
But certainly not 3 (which is yours here), as regards Paul. He was the
second of the great Jewish apostates.
And his teaching that the only
Jews are the ones who followed Jesus is preposterous.
Preposterous to you - but not preposterous to those who are Jews.
You accept Paul's polemical definition of what he wants Jews to be. Of
course that's what he wants because he's trying to start a new religion
by poaching Jews from the community.
Your above statement proves your woeful ignorance of Christian doctrine - and
that is all it proves.
I know more about Christian doctrine than you do about Judaism. And it
doesn't take any understanding of Christian dogma to see what he was
doing. Lenin did the same thing by defining his minority party, the
Bolsheviks, as the majority party. He then followed the early Christian
precedent of murdering everyone who disagreed with him.

But I do understand: you have to follow Pauline dogma because you are a
Christian.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You're back to your old tricks of denying the existence of modern Jewry
any way you can.
I don't deny the existence of modern Jews - as modern Jews are just as Paul
describes in Romans 2:28-29 quoted above.
Yes you do. Your definition requires Jews to reject Judaism.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
We've got two methods now: first the false notion that
geneological records were ever stored in the Temple,
It doesn't matter where they were stored. Do they exist today?
What a joke! It's irrelevant to Judaism. It only matters to Christians
of your particular ilk.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
and now Paul's oxymoronic definition.
You're misusing the word "oxymoronic" - there is nothing that Paul writes that
demonstrates he is being oxymoronic - I suggest you look up the term.
No I'm not. Here's a definition from Webster.com:
Main Entry: ox·y·mo·ron
Pronunciation: "äk-sE-'mor-"än
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural ox·y·mo·ra /-'mor-&/
Etymology: Late Greek oxymOron, from neuter of oxymOros pointedly
foolish, from Greek oxys sharp, keen + mOros foolish
: a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (as cruel
kindness); broadly : something (as a concept) that is made up of
contradictory or incongruous elements

The definition describes exactly what Paul's definition is: a
combination of contradictory or incongrous words. Paul requires that
Jews reject Judaism to follow Jesus of Nazareth. This is a contradiction
because it requires Jews to do something forbidden by Judaism. Hence the
contradiction.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
The crux of the message of the Gospel is that a person need simply have faith
in Jesus Christ in order to be saved.
Rom 10:5-10 Moses writes about being made right by following the law. He says,
"A person who obeys these things will live because of them." {6} But this is
what the Scripture says about being made right through faith: "Don't say to
yourself, 'Who will go up into heaven?'" (That means, "Who will go up to heaven
and bring Christ down to earth?") {7} "And do not say, 'Who will go down into
the world below?'" (That means, "Who will go down and bring Christ up from the
dead?") {8} This is what the Scripture says: "The word is near you; it is in
your mouth and in your heart." That is the teaching of faith that we are
telling. {9} If you use your mouth to say, "Jesus is Lord," and if you believe
in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, you will be saved. {10} We
believe with our hearts, and so we are made right with God. And we use our
mouths to say that we believe, and so we are saved. (NCV)
Having faith in Christ is doing nothing except to simply believe - and simply
believing does not require belonging to a religion.
Having faith is action, believing is action.
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an action - but
it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with uplifted hands to
receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven - whereas believing is
the action of eating that Bread of Life.
Begging is action.
I have seen beggars sitting on the sidewalk with a cup resting on the sidewalk
beside them - these beggars were "doing nothing" except receiving the coins
that were dropped in their cups. Receiving something for "doing nothing" is not
an action - and Paul delineates this premise as it relates to the Gospel.
They choose to sit and beg. That's action.
Why can't you accept that you have joined a religion, even if you choose
not to do the work of participation?
Post by Rob
Eph 2:8-9 I mean that you have been saved by grace through believing. You did
not save yourselves; it was a gift from God. {9} It was not the result of your
own efforts, so you cannot brag about it. (NCV)
Not a Jewish teaching. Doesn't help here except to explain where your
belief.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
In any case your beliefs
drive you to say some mighty peculiar things and who knows what actions.
The Gospel is peculiar to those who reject it because they see it as being
foolish. Conversely - the Gospel is peculiar to those who accept it because
they see it as the power of God.
I don't see your gospel as being "foolish."
You already dismissed Paul's definition of a Jew as nonsense - so you do indeed
see the Gospel as being foolish.
It's not nonsense - it includes semantic content even if it is
oxymoronic, inappropriate and invalid.
Post by Rob
1 Cor 1:18 I know very well how foolish the message of the cross sounds to
those who are on the road to destruction. But we who are being saved recognize
this message as the very power of God. (NLT)
Arrogant. Typical of certain types of Christians. You claim that
everyone other than people who believe like you are wrong and therefore
damned.

As Mark Twain said, "Heaven for the weather, Hell for the company."
Rob
2005-09-02 21:56:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Apparently you're referring to my reference regarding Nehemiah - I never said
there were no Jews - so you obviously got me mixed up with someone else.
No I don't. Here's the posting in its entirety. It is part of a thread
<snip>
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
It says nothing here about who was Jewish,
Right. He was rebuilding the place. It says nothing here about who was
Jewish, only where they were from. Nothing about who was and who wasn't.
Genealogy, then as now, is important to the Jews. I know of at least
one who can trace her ancestry back to Aaron the Kohen Gadol (High
Priest) with documentary evidence.
I responded to your above claim that Nehemiah says nothing about who
Are you blind? Nehemiah makes a direct reference to who is Jewish in v. 6 when
he says "Here is the list of the Jewish exiles".
Anyone who is not brain dead can clearly see from my above quote that I am
not arguing that there are "no Jews" - but that there "are Jews".
But elsewhere you use the oxymoronic definition that the only Jews today
are the ones that became apostates to worship Jesus of Nazareth.
That's your definition - not mine.
Post by cactus
And
you also make the statement that no one is a Jew who can't prove their
ancestry going back at least to Second Temple times.
Jews who are living today can prove it - but you can't prove it by your own
admission.
You just define "Jews" as those who meet your criteria. I can't stop you
from doing so, even though it is totally wrong.
Nice projection.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
No I don't. It's neither part of my religion nor my personal belief. It
doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, or vice versa.
You're being absurd - you either accept my belief as being a valid belief - or
you do not - and you do not.
I accept your belief as being valid for you, and maybe perhaps for other
Christians,
but not for anyone who is not a Christian.
Which means you reject it - like I already said.
No I don't: I can't reject Christianity because I never accepted it in
the first place.
You're being absurd - I reject your delusional opinion - and I never accepted
it in the first place.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
A person BELIEVES the Gospel - whereas a person JOINS a religion. The
commandment from Jesus is to follow Him - but nowhere does Jesus give
the command to join a religion. And as I've said before - the Gospel is the
antithesis of religion.
Believing is taking action, which means that a believer becomes a member
of the religion, at least for Christianity.
Again - that's your delusional opinion - which I reject for the nonsense it is.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is one
inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not
literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This is not part of the Jewish canon,
It is part of the Jewish canon to those who are real Jews
Your "real Jews" are apostates or invalid converts.
Real Jews are those who are described by Paul in Rom 2:28-29 above - that is
the Word of God and that is Christian doctrine - you can deny that fact but you
cannot refute that fact.
Post by cactus
- and real Jews are
Post by Rob
the ones Paul the apostle describes in the above verses. Paul would consider
you a Gentile - and so do I.
I consider Paul to be an apostate from Judaism.
Paul considers you a Gentile - and under the New Covenant that is what
you are.
Post by cactus
He defines Jews as people like him.
That is false - Paul says no such thing.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I don't understand this because you accused me of admiring Paul the
apostle,
I asked you a question. Do you know what a question is?
What's a question?
Post by Rob
So are you telling me that you admire Paul the apostle's teaching that the
only people who are really Jews are those who believe in Jesus Christ?
No I do not admire Paul for that at all. He was deadly wrong. But he's
not the only one to create contradicitions for sectarian ends. I
consider him to be right up there with V. Lenin, who did exactly the
same thing.
Paul is the primary architect of the blueprint for the Christian church - and
Christians are followers of Paul - so you are also accusing Christians of being
up there with Lenin. But the only thing you prove by your accusation is that
you are a hate monger.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You accept Paul's polemical definition of what he wants Jews to be. Of
course that's what he wants because he's trying to start a new religion
by poaching Jews from the community.
Your above statement proves your woeful ignorance of Christian doctrine - and
that is all it proves.
I know more about Christian doctrine than you do about Judaism.
That is false - you already proved you know nothing of Christian doctrine.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
We've got two methods now: first the false notion that
geneological records were ever stored in the Temple,
It doesn't matter where they were stored. Do they exist today?
What a joke! It's irrelevant to Judaism.
So what? It's also irrelevant to penguins living in Antarctica - but it was not
irrelevant to Nehemiah - which is why it is not irrelevant to Jews.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
You're misusing the word "oxymoronic" - there is nothing that Paul writes that
demonstrates he is being oxymoronic - I suggest you look up the term.
Main Entry: ox·y·mo·ron
Pronunciation: "äk-sE-'mor-"än
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural ox·y·mo·ra /-'mor-&/
Etymology: Late Greek oxymOron, from neuter of oxymOros pointedly
foolish, from Greek oxys sharp, keen + mOros foolish
: a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (as cruel
kindness); broadly : something (as a concept) that is made up of
contradictory or incongruous elements
The definition describes exactly what Paul's definition is: a
combination of contradictory or incongrous words.
Paul requires that
Jews reject Judaism to follow Jesus of Nazareth.
That is not oxymoronic - Paul was simply saying the OT Jews should reject their
pagan ways - which was the message to them from the prophets throughout the OT.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Having faith is action, believing is action.
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an action - but
it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with uplifted hands to
receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven - whereas believing is
the action of eating that Bread of Life.
Begging is action.
I have seen beggars sitting on the sidewalk with a cup resting on the sidewalk
beside them - these beggars were "doing nothing" except receiving the coins
that were dropped in their cups. Receiving something for "doing nothing" is not
an action - and Paul delineates this premise as it relates to the Gospel.
They choose to sit and beg. That's action.
The metaphor of a beggar as it relates to Grace is a paradoxical concept
that is arcane - and can be difficult to grasp - especially for those who
subscribe to a religion - which is why it obviously flies over your head.
Perhaps a better example for you would be dead people. Do dead people
perform actions - or not perform actions?
Post by cactus
Why can't you accept that you have joined a religion,
That's like saying: Why can't a zebra accept that it is a giraffe?
Uhhh - because it's a zebra ya think?
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I don't see your gospel as being "foolish."
You already dismissed Paul's definition of a Jew as nonsense - so you do indeed
see the Gospel as being foolish.
It's not nonsense -
If it's not nonsense - then it sensible. And I agree.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
1 Cor 1:18 I know very well how foolish the message of the cross sounds to
those who are on the road to destruction. But we who are being saved recognize
this message as the very power of God. (NLT)
Arrogant.
You just called the Word of God arrogant - so it is you who is being arrogant.
Post by cactus
Typical of certain types of Christians.
You claim that
everyone other than people who believe like you are wrong and therefore
damned.
I claim no such thing - I simply believe what the Word of God plainly states.

John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe
is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only
begotten Son of God. (NKJV)

Rob
cactus
2005-09-02 22:28:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Apparently you're referring to my reference regarding Nehemiah - I never said
there were no Jews - so you obviously got me mixed up with someone else.
No I don't. Here's the posting in its entirety. It is part of a thread
<snip>
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
It says nothing here about who was Jewish,
Right. He was rebuilding the place. It says nothing here about who was
Jewish, only where they were from. Nothing about who was and who wasn't.
Genealogy, then as now, is important to the Jews. I know of at least
one who can trace her ancestry back to Aaron the Kohen Gadol (High
Priest) with documentary evidence.
I responded to your above claim that Nehemiah says nothing about who
Are you blind? Nehemiah makes a direct reference to who is Jewish in v. 6 when
he says "Here is the list of the Jewish exiles".
Anyone who is not brain dead can clearly see from my above quote that I am
not arguing that there are "no Jews" - but that there "are Jews".
But elsewhere you use the oxymoronic definition that the only Jews today
are the ones that became apostates to worship Jesus of Nazareth.
That's your definition - not mine.
Post by cactus
And
you also make the statement that no one is a Jew who can't prove their
ancestry going back at least to Second Temple times.
Jews who are living today can prove it - but you can't prove it by your own
admission.
You just define "Jews" as those who meet your criteria. I can't stop you
from doing so, even though it is totally wrong.
Nice projection.
We obviously disagree.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
No I don't. It's neither part of my religion nor my personal belief. It
doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, or vice versa.
You're being absurd - you either accept my belief as being a valid belief - or
you do not - and you do not.
I accept your belief as being valid for you, and maybe perhaps for other
Christians,
but not for anyone who is not a Christian.
Which means you reject it - like I already said.
No I don't: I can't reject Christianity because I never accepted it in
the first place.
You're being absurd - I reject your delusional opinion - and I never accepted
it in the first place.
Of course not.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
A person BELIEVES the Gospel - whereas a person JOINS a religion. The
commandment from Jesus is to follow Him - but nowhere does Jesus give
the command to join a religion. And as I've said before - the Gospel is the
antithesis of religion.
Believing is taking action, which means that a believer becomes a member
of the religion, at least for Christianity.
Again - that's your delusional opinion - which I reject for the nonsense it is.
You can't afford to believe it, because it interferes with your orderly,
if bizarre, little idioverse.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is one
inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not
literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This is not part of the Jewish canon,
It is part of the Jewish canon to those who are real Jews
Your "real Jews" are apostates or invalid converts.
Real Jews are those who are described by Paul in Rom 2:28-29 above - that is
the Word of God and that is Christian doctrine - you can deny that fact but you
cannot refute that fact.
It might be Christian dogma, but I am not a Christian, so am not subject
to it.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
- and real Jews are
Post by Rob
the ones Paul the apostle describes in the above verses. Paul would consider
you a Gentile - and so do I.
I consider Paul to be an apostate from Judaism.
Paul considers you a Gentile - and under the New Covenant that is what
you are.
And the Nazis considered us something else. But we are not covered under
your new covenant because we still subscribe to the original one. Call
us what you will, it won't bring us under that aegis.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
He defines Jews as people like him.
That is false - Paul says no such thing.
Sure he does. He's an apostate from Judaism, so he defines "Jews" as
fellow apostates.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I don't understand this because you accused me of admiring Paul the
apostle,
I asked you a question. Do you know what a question is?
What's a question?
Post by Rob
So are you telling me that you admire Paul the apostle's teaching that the
only people who are really Jews are those who believe in Jesus Christ?
No I do not admire Paul for that at all. He was deadly wrong. But he's
not the only one to create contradicitions for sectarian ends. I
consider him to be right up there with V. Lenin, who did exactly the
same thing.
Paul is the primary architect of the blueprint for the Christian church - and
Christians are followers of Paul - so you are also accusing Christians of being
up there with Lenin. But the only thing you prove by your accusation is that
you are a hate monger.
No, I am stating that Paul followed a strategy similar to Lenin's.
Normally I don't care what Paul said, but you brought it up, so I am
responding to what you posted.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You accept Paul's polemical definition of what he wants Jews to be. Of
course that's what he wants because he's trying to start a new religion
by poaching Jews from the community.
Your above statement proves your woeful ignorance of Christian doctrine - and
that is all it proves.
I know more about Christian doctrine than you do about Judaism.
That is false - you already proved you know nothing of Christian doctrine.
I may not know much about your particular beliefs, but I think that your
variety of Christianity is so far out of the mainstream as to make it
incomprehensible to most people.

Four years in a Christian high school has at least given me the basics
of mainstream Christianity. Fortunately or otherwise there was no
information provided regarding the beliefs of bizarre outliers.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
We've got two methods now: first the false notion that
geneological records were ever stored in the Temple,
It doesn't matter where they were stored. Do they exist today?
What a joke! It's irrelevant to Judaism.
So what? It's also irrelevant to penguins living in Antarctica - but it was not
irrelevant to Nehemiah - which is why it is not irrelevant to Jews.
But your incorrect interpretation is irrelevant to Jews except insofar
as its expression poses danger to the Jewish community.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
You're misusing the word "oxymoronic" - there is nothing that Paul writes that
demonstrates he is being oxymoronic - I suggest you look up the term.
Main Entry: ox·y·mo·ron
Pronunciation: "äk-sE-'mor-"än
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural ox·y·mo·ra /-'mor-&/
Etymology: Late Greek oxymOron, from neuter of oxymOros pointedly
foolish, from Greek oxys sharp, keen + mOros foolish
: a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (as cruel
kindness); broadly : something (as a concept) that is made up of
contradictory or incongruous elements
The definition describes exactly what Paul's definition is: a
combination of contradictory or incongrous words.
Paul requires that
Jews reject Judaism to follow Jesus of Nazareth.
That is not oxymoronic - Paul was simply saying the OT Jews should reject their
pagan ways - which was the message to them from the prophets throughout the OT.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Having faith is action, believing is action.
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an action - but
it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with uplifted hands to
receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven - whereas believing is
the action of eating that Bread of Life.
Begging is action.
I have seen beggars sitting on the sidewalk with a cup resting on the sidewalk
beside them - these beggars were "doing nothing" except receiving the coins
that were dropped in their cups. Receiving something for "doing nothing" is not
an action - and Paul delineates this premise as it relates to the Gospel.
They choose to sit and beg. That's action.
The metaphor of a beggar as it relates to Grace is a paradoxical concept
that is arcane - and can be difficult to grasp - especially for those who
subscribe to a religion - which is why it obviously flies over your head.
It's still action. And you act on your beliefs, so you are a member of
a religion.
Post by Rob
Perhaps a better example for you would be dead people. Do dead people
perform actions - or not perform actions?
Dead people are dead, so they cannot perform actions. What's the point?
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Why can't you accept that you have joined a religion,
That's like saying: Why can't a zebra accept that it is a giraffe?
Uhhh - because it's a zebra ya think?
A zebra, like yourself, lacks the insight as to what it is. It simply
lives a zebra's life. Since you appear to be a secular, rather
intolerant Christian, I would not say that you live a Christian life,
however.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I don't see your gospel as being "foolish."
You already dismissed Paul's definition of a Jew as nonsense - so you do indeed
see the Gospel as being foolish.
It's not nonsense -
If it's not nonsense - then it sensible. And I agree.
Just as sensible as the famous Noam Chomsky quote: "Colorless green
ideas sleep furiously."
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
1 Cor 1:18 I know very well how foolish the message of the cross sounds to
those who are on the road to destruction. But we who are being saved recognize
this message as the very power of God. (NLT)
Arrogant.
You just called the Word of God arrogant - so it is you who is being arrogant.
No that was a human writing this. And your take on it is certainly arrogant.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Typical of certain types of Christians.
You claim that
everyone other than people who believe like you are wrong and therefore
damned.
I claim no such thing - I simply believe what the Word of God plainly states.
Plenty of other religions hear G-d's word as well. Christianity does not
have a monopoly regardless of what some Christians think.
Post by Rob
John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe
is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only
begotten Son of God. (NKJV)
Fine for you to understand it as the word of God. You just do such
strange things with it.
El Bleacho
2005-09-02 22:35:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Plenty of other religions hear G-d's word as well. Christianity does
not have a monopoly regardless of what some Christians think.
Norm Abram is a way better carpenter than Jesus was; and Norm never lied
about being a messiah.
--
_____________________
I am hung like Einstein;
and as smart as a horse!
Rob
2005-09-03 03:20:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Real Jews are those who are described by Paul in Rom 2:28-29 above - that is
the Word of God and that is Christian doctrine - you can deny that fact but you
cannot refute that fact.
It might be Christian dogma, but I am not a Christian, so am not subject
to it.
I already know that - and that is because it is impossible for you to be.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I consider Paul to be an apostate from Judaism.
Paul considers you a Gentile - and under the New Covenant that is what
you are.
And the Nazis
Godwin's Law - game over - you lose. :-)
Post by cactus
considered us something else.
But we are not covered under
your new covenant because
we still subscribe to the original one.
Big whoop - so does Islam - so do most other religions - if not all.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
He defines Jews as people like him.
That is false - Paul says no such thing.
Sure he does.
Chapter and verse?
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
So are you telling me that you admire Paul the apostle's teaching that the
only people who are really Jews are those who believe in Jesus Christ?
No I do not admire Paul for that at all. He was deadly wrong. But he's
not the only one to create contradicitions for sectarian ends. I
consider him to be right up there with V. Lenin, who did exactly the
same thing.
Paul is the primary architect of the blueprint for the Christian church - and
Christians are followers of Paul - so you are also accusing Christians of being
up there with Lenin. But the only thing you prove by your accusation is that
you are a hate monger.
No, I am stating that Paul followed a strategy similar to Lenin's.
Your actions prove otherwise.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You accept Paul's polemical definition of what he wants Jews to be. Of
course that's what he wants because he's trying to start a new religion
by poaching Jews from the community.
Your above statement proves your woeful ignorance of Christian doctrine - and
that is all it proves.
I know more about Christian doctrine than you do about Judaism.
That is false - you already proved you know nothing of Christian doctrine.
I may not know much about your particular beliefs, but I think that your
variety of Christianity is so far out of the mainstream
Paul's teachings are out of mainstream Christianity? You are clearly dazed
and confused.
Post by cactus
Four years in a Christian high school
Go tell it to some wino on the street - for a pint of Port I'm sure they'll
be very impressed.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
What a joke! It's irrelevant to Judaism.
So what? It's also irrelevant to penguins living in Antarctica - but it was not
irrelevant to Nehemiah - which is why it is not irrelevant to Jews.
But your incorrect interpretation
Another projection. Congratulations - the one thing you are adept at.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Having faith is action, believing is action.
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an action - but
it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with uplifted hands to
receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven - whereas believing is
the action of eating that Bread of Life.
Begging is action.
I have seen beggars sitting on the sidewalk with a cup resting on the sidewalk
beside them - these beggars were "doing nothing" except receiving the coins
that were dropped in their cups. Receiving something for "doing nothing" is not
an action - and Paul delineates this premise as it relates to the Gospel.
They choose to sit and beg. That's action.
The metaphor of a beggar as it relates to Grace is a paradoxical concept
that is arcane - and can be difficult to grasp - especially for those who
subscribe to a religion - which is why it obviously flies over your head.
It's still action.
You fail to grasp the Christian principle of the metaphor - but I digress.
Post by cactus
And you act on your beliefs, so you are a member of
a religion.
Only according to your fantasy world - I'm happy for you.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Perhaps a better example for you would be dead people. Do dead people
perform actions - or not perform actions?
Dead people are dead, so they cannot perform actions.
What's the point?
In John 11 Lazarus was dead - but when Jesus raised him to life he believed.
Lazarus' faith was dead until he was brought to life - and only then could he
perform the action of believing - and this is precisely the reason why James
says "faith without actions is dead".

James 2:17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by
action, is dead. (NIV)

Rob
cactus
2005-09-04 04:19:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Real Jews are those who are described by Paul in Rom 2:28-29 above - that is
the Word of God and that is Christian doctrine - you can deny that fact but you
cannot refute that fact.
It might be Christian dogma, but I am not a Christian, so am not subject
to it.
I already know that - and that is because it is impossible for you to be.
And for my children. Eat your heart out.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I consider Paul to be an apostate from Judaism.
Paul considers you a Gentile - and under the New Covenant that is what
you are.
And the Nazis
Godwin's Law - game over - you lose. :-)
Maybe. In this case is a matter of total indifference to me.

This from Wikipedia
One common objection to the invocation of Godwin's law is that sometimes
using Hitler or the Nazis is a perfectly apt way of making a point. For
instance, if one is debating the relative merits of a particular leader,
and someone says something like, "He's a good leader, look at the way
he's improved the economy", one could reply, "Just because he improved
the economy doesn't make him a good leader. Even Hitler improved the
economy." Some would view this as a perfectly acceptable comparison. One
uses Hitler as a well-known example of an extreme case that requires no
explanation to prove that a generalization is not universally true.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
considered us something else.
But we are not covered under
your new covenant because
we still subscribe to the original one.
Big whoop - so does Islam - so do most other religions - if not all.
Muslims do not subscribe to the covenant of the Jews, nor does any other
religion AFAIK. Please provide specific details if you know of religions
other than Judaism that adhere to the Covenant with the Jews.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
He defines Jews as people like him.
That is false - Paul says no such thing.
Sure he does.
Chapter and verse?
This is your interpretation, taken from your post of 9:41 PM PDT on
9/1/2005:
__________________________________________________________________________
I agree the Jewish faith exists - and I agree there are Jews - but Paul
the apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones
who have faith in Christ per the following.

Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
__________________________________________________________________________

You make this into as neat a contradiction as I have ever seen.
According to your interpretatation, one can't be a Jews without
rejecting Judaism to follow Jesus.

I have no idea whether any (or many) Christians would agree with your
interpretation. If your take on this is standard within Christianity,
you should be able to produce other sources. OTOH, it may only be an
interpetation from your fevered imagination.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
So are you telling me that you admire Paul the apostle's teaching that the
only people who are really Jews are those who believe in Jesus Christ?
No I do not admire Paul for that at all. He was deadly wrong. But he's
not the only one to create contradicitions for sectarian ends. I
consider him to be right up there with V. Lenin, who did exactly the
same thing.
Paul is the primary architect of the blueprint for the Christian church - and
Christians are followers of Paul - so you are also accusing Christians of being
up there with Lenin. But the only thing you prove by your accusation is that
you are a hate monger.
No, I am stating that Paul followed a strategy similar to Lenin's.
Your actions prove otherwise.
?
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You accept Paul's polemical definition of what he wants Jews to be. Of
course that's what he wants because he's trying to start a new religion
by poaching Jews from the community.
Your above statement proves your woeful ignorance of Christian doctrine - and
that is all it proves.
I know more about Christian doctrine than you do about Judaism.
That is false - you already proved you know nothing of Christian doctrine.
And do you know anything at all about Judaism?
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I may not know much about your particular beliefs, but I think that your
variety of Christianity is so far out of the mainstream
Paul's teachings are out of mainstream Christianity? You are clearly dazed
and confused.
No, but your interpretation may very well be. Do you have respectable
backing for what you assert?
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Four years in a Christian high school
Go tell it to some wino on the street - for a pint of Port I'm sure they'll
be very impressed.
You don't care about anyone or anything else do you?
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
What a joke! It's irrelevant to Judaism.
So what? It's also irrelevant to penguins living in Antarctica - but it was not
irrelevant to Nehemiah - which is why it is not irrelevant to Jews.
But your incorrect interpretation
Another projection. Congratulations - the one thing you are adept at.
You don't care about anyone or anything else do you?
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Having faith is action, believing is action.
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an action - but
it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with uplifted hands to
receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven - whereas believing is
the action of eating that Bread of Life.
Begging is action.
I have seen beggars sitting on the sidewalk with a cup resting on the sidewalk
beside them - these beggars were "doing nothing" except receiving the coins
that were dropped in their cups. Receiving something for "doing nothing" is not
an action - and Paul delineates this premise as it relates to the Gospel.
They choose to sit and beg. That's action.
The metaphor of a beggar as it relates to Grace is a paradoxical concept
that is arcane - and can be difficult to grasp - especially for those who
subscribe to a religion - which is why it obviously flies over your head.
It's still action.
You fail to grasp the Christian principle of the metaphor - but I digress.
Pending an appropriate explanation, it seems to me that the beggars do
nothing spiritually for themselves, just hope that something will come
their way when those who are going about their spiritual activities lead
much richer spiritual lives.

Begging is cultivated as a spiritual discipline in some sects of
Buddhism, but I don't see any discipline in what you describe, just
spiritual laziness. Maybe these beggars could use some spiritual
welfare or AFDC.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
And you act on your beliefs, so you are a member of
a religion.
Only according to your fantasy world - I'm happy for you.
Denial and deflection seem to be your major talents. You can't respond
intelligently, let alone intelligibly, so you have to make comments like
the one just above.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Perhaps a better example for you would be dead people. Do dead people
perform actions - or not perform actions?
Dead people are dead, so they cannot perform actions.
What's the point?
In John 11 Lazarus was dead - but when Jesus raised him to life he believed.
That's not unknown. I had a professor who became a Christian Scientist
when his mother recovered under the care of a Healer after medical
science couldn't cure her.
Post by Rob
Lazarus' faith was dead until he was brought to life - and only then could he
perform the action of believing - and this is precisely the reason why James
says "faith without actions is dead".
James 2:17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by
action, is dead. (NIV)
So now you contradict yourself. On 9/1/2005 at 11:53 PDT you said
______________________________________________________________________________
Having faith in Christ is doing nothing except to simply believe - and
simply believing does not require belonging to a religion.
______________________________________________________________________________

Then at 9:41 PM on the same date, you said
______________________________________________________________________________
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an
action - but it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with
uplifted hands to receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven -
whereas believing is the action of eating that Bread of Life.
______________________________________________________________________________

Then at 8:58 AM PDT on 9/2/2005 you said
______________________________________________________________________________
I have seen beggars sitting on the sidewalk with a cup resting on the
sidewalk beside them - these beggars were "doing nothing" except
receiving the coins that were dropped in their cups. Receiving something
for "doing nothing" is not an action - and Paul delineates this premise
as it relates to the Gospel.
______________________________________________________________________________

It therefore appears that your faith is dead since you deny that
supplicating is action. You therefore do not take any action on behalf
of your faith, which is therefore dead.
Rob
2005-09-04 15:51:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Real Jews are those who are described by Paul in Rom 2:28-29 above - that is
the Word of God and that is Christian doctrine - you can deny that fact but you
cannot refute that fact.
It might be Christian dogma, but I am not a Christian, so am not subject
to it.
I already know that - and that is because it is impossible for you to be.
And for my children. Eat your heart out.
Huh? It flew over your head - but that's par.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I consider Paul to be an apostate from Judaism.
Paul considers you a Gentile - and under the New Covenant that is what
you are.
And the Nazis
Godwin's Law - game over - you lose. :-)
Maybe. In this case is a matter of total indifference to me.
This from Wikipedia
<yawn>
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Big whoop - so does Islam - so do most other religions - if not all.
Muslims do not subscribe to the covenant of the Jews, nor does any other
religion AFAIK.
So when did all these other religions legalize murder?
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
He defines Jews as people like him.
That is false - Paul says no such thing.
Sure he does.
Chapter and verse?
This is your interpretation, taken from your post of 9:41 PM PDT on
__________________________________________________________________________
I agree the Jewish faith exists - and I agree there are Jews - but Paul
the apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones
who have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
Where does Paul say in the above verse that Jews are people like him?
HINT: Nowhere.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I know more about Christian doctrine than you do about Judaism.
That is false - you already proved you know nothing of Christian doctrine.
And do you know anything at all about Judaism?
I know it's a religion.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I may not know much about your particular beliefs, but I think that your
variety of Christianity is so far out of the mainstream
Paul's teachings are out of mainstream Christianity? You are clearly dazed
and confused.
No, but your interpretation may very well be.
I don't need to interpret Rom 2:28-29 - I simply believe it on its face value.

Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
Post by cactus
Do you have respectable
backing for what you assert?
Paul the apostle is more than respectable backing.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
You fail to grasp the Christian principle of the metaphor - but I digress.
Pending an appropriate explanation, it seems to me that the beggars do
nothing spiritually for themselves, just hope that something will come
their way when those who are going about their spiritual activities lead
much richer spiritual lives.
Begging is cultivated as a spiritual discipline in some sects of
Buddhism, but I don't see any discipline in what you describe, just
spiritual laziness. Maybe these beggars could use some spiritual
welfare or AFDC.
Again - I digress.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Perhaps a better example for you would be dead people. Do dead people
perform actions - or not perform actions?
Dead people are dead, so they cannot perform actions.
What's the point?
In John 11 Lazarus was dead - but when Jesus raised him to life he believed.
That's not unknown. I had a professor who became a Christian Scientist
when his mother recovered under the care of a Healer after medical
science couldn't cure her.
The fact remains - a dead person cannot perform actions. Lazarus was a
dead person who could not perform actions because his faith was dead - and
that is the point.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Lazarus' faith was dead until he was brought to life - and only then could he
perform the action of believing - and this is precisely the reason why James
says "faith without actions is dead".
James 2:17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by
action, is dead. (NIV)
So now you contradict yourself. On 9/1/2005 at 11:53 PDT you said
You can rationalize it however you wish - but your rationalization does not
change the fact that James says faith without action is dead. Lazarus had
faith but it was a dead faith - but his dead faith was transformed into a
living faith once Jesus resurrected him.

Rob
cactus
2005-09-04 17:29:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Real Jews are those who are described by Paul in Rom 2:28-29 above - that is
the Word of God and that is Christian doctrine - you can deny that fact but you
cannot refute that fact.
It might be Christian dogma, but I am not a Christian, so am not subject
to it.
I already know that - and that is because it is impossible for you to be.
And for my children. Eat your heart out.
Huh? It flew over your head - but that's par.
No it didn't. It's impossible for me to be a Christian because I'm
Jewish. It would be easier for me to be a Moslem or a Buddhist or a
Taoist because their doctrines make more sense to me than Christianity.
I can't speak for those other religions with respect to my children,
but they certainly find Judaism spiritually congenial.

If you had a different point maybe you should convey it directly.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I consider Paul to be an apostate from Judaism.
Paul considers you a Gentile - and under the New Covenant that is what
you are.
And the Nazis
Godwin's Law - game over - you lose. :-)
Maybe. In this case is a matter of total indifference to me.
This from Wikipedia
<yawn>
Typical. When you get a valid response you sneer or ignore it. The fact
is that you don't care because you already have your views, but will not
work to defend them.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Big whoop - so does Islam - so do most other religions - if not all.
Muslims do not subscribe to the covenant of the Jews, nor does any other
religion AFAIK.
So when did all these other religions legalize murder?
Do you know what the Covenant of the Jews actually is?
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
He defines Jews as people like him.
That is false - Paul says no such thing.
Sure he does.
Chapter and verse?
This is your interpretation, taken from your post of 9:41 PM PDT on
__________________________________________________________________________
I agree the Jewish faith exists - and I agree there are Jews - but Paul
the apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones
who have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
Where does Paul say in the above verse that Jews are people like him?
HINT: Nowhere.
It's your interpretation not mine. Paul became an apostate from Judaism.
You interpret that text as saying that "the only people who are really
Jews are the ones who have faith in Christ..." (above). That's what he
did. He wants everyone else to do it too, to be like him spiritually.
That's the point. QED.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I know more about Christian doctrine than you do about Judaism.
That is false - you already proved you know nothing of Christian doctrine.
And do you know anything at all about Judaism?
I know it's a religion.
Right. So far so good. But insufficient for what you are trying to do.

If ignorance is bliss, you are in Nirvana.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I may not know much about your particular beliefs, but I think that your
variety of Christianity is so far out of the mainstream
Paul's teachings are out of mainstream Christianity? You are clearly dazed
and confused.
No, but your interpretation may very well be.
I don't need to interpret Rom 2:28-29 - I simply believe it on its face value.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This says nothing about the only Jews following Jesus. He only
paraphrases several prophets who state that G-d prefers doing justice,
among other things, to sacrifice.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Do you have respectable
backing for what you assert?
Paul the apostle is more than respectable backing.
He might be, but you cannot provide any respectable backing for your
interpretation of what he said.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
You fail to grasp the Christian principle of the metaphor - but I digress.
Pending an appropriate explanation, it seems to me that the beggars do
nothing spiritually for themselves, just hope that something will come
their way when those who are going about their spiritual activities lead
much richer spiritual lives.
Begging is cultivated as a spiritual discipline in some sects of
Buddhism, but I don't see any discipline in what you describe, just
spiritual laziness. Maybe these beggars could use some spiritual
welfare or AFDC.
Again - I digress.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Perhaps a better example for you would be dead people. Do dead people
perform actions - or not perform actions?
Dead people are dead, so they cannot perform actions.
What's the point?
In John 11 Lazarus was dead - but when Jesus raised him to life he believed.
That's not unknown. I had a professor who became a Christian Scientist
when his mother recovered under the care of a Healer after medical
science couldn't cure her.
The fact remains - a dead person cannot perform actions. Lazarus was a
dead person who could not perform actions because his faith was dead - and
that is the point.
Right. But your earlier quotes stated that no action is required, only
belief. You assert that belief is not an action.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Lazarus' faith was dead until he was brought to life - and only then could he
perform the action of believing - and this is precisely the reason why James
says "faith without actions is dead".
James 2:17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by
action, is dead. (NIV)
So now you contradict yourself. On 9/1/2005 at 11:53 PDT you said
You can rationalize it however you wish - but your rationalization does not
change the fact that James says faith without action is dead. Lazarus had
faith but it was a dead faith - but his dead faith was transformed into a
living faith once Jesus resurrected him.
So he does, but you state that action is not necessary, only belief and
waiting for salvation to drop from heaven into your upturned hands. And
you assert that those are not actions. So your belief is devoid of
action. You dishonestly snipped my response to your request for a quote.

I've noticed you do that only when I'm right. That's dishonest on your
part, but I'm not surprised.
Rob
2005-09-04 22:09:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Big whoop - so does Islam - so do most other religions - if not all.
Muslims do not subscribe to the covenant of the Jews, nor does any other
religion AFAIK.
So when did all these other religions legalize murder?
Do you know what the Covenant of the Jews actually is?
Nice dodge.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
Where does Paul say in the above verse that Jews are people like him?
HINT: Nowhere.
It's your interpretation not mine.
Paul says it nowhere - so you have no argument.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I know more about Christian doctrine than you do about Judaism.
That is false - you already proved you know nothing of Christian doctrine.
And do you know anything at all about Judaism?
I know it's a religion.
Right.
But you don't know what Christianity is.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I may not know much about your particular beliefs, but I think that your
variety of Christianity is so far out of the mainstream
Paul's teachings are out of mainstream Christianity? You are clearly dazed
and confused.
No, but your interpretation may very well be.
I don't need to interpret Rom 2:28-29 - I simply believe it on its face value.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This says nothing about the only Jews following Jesus.
So what? It says nothing about the price of coffee in Brazil, either.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Do you have respectable
backing for what you assert?
Paul the apostle is more than respectable backing.
He might be, but you cannot provide any respectable backing for your
interpretation of what he said.
That is a false construct - I have interpreted nothing.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Perhaps a better example for you would be dead people. Do dead people
perform actions - or not perform actions?
Dead people are dead, so they cannot perform actions.
What's the point?
In John 11 Lazarus was dead - but when Jesus raised him to life he believed.
That's not unknown. I had a professor who became a Christian Scientist
when his mother recovered under the care of a Healer after medical
science couldn't cure her.
The fact remains - a dead person cannot perform actions. Lazarus was a
dead person who could not perform actions because his faith was dead - and
that is the point.
Right. But
your earlier quotes stated that no action is required
You are a liar - I never stated no action is required.
Post by cactus
You assert that belief is not an action.
Liar.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Lazarus' faith was dead until he was brought to life - and only then could he
perform the action of believing - and this is precisely the reason why James
says "faith without actions is dead".
James 2:17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by
action, is dead. (NIV)
So now you contradict yourself. On 9/1/2005 at 11:53 PDT you said
You can rationalize it however you wish - but your rationalization does not
change the fact that James says faith without action is dead. Lazarus had
faith but it was a dead faith - but his dead faith was transformed into a
living faith once Jesus resurrected him.
So he does, but you state that action is not necessary, only belief and
waiting for salvation to drop from heaven into your upturned hands. And
you assert that those are not actions. So your belief is devoid of
action. You dishonestly snipped my response to your request for a quote.
I've noticed you do that only when I'm right. That's dishonest on your
part, but I'm not surprised.
You're being childish - again.

Rob
cactus
2005-09-05 05:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Big whoop - so does Islam - so do most other religions - if not all.
Muslims do not subscribe to the covenant of the Jews, nor does any other
religion AFAIK.
So when did all these other religions legalize murder?
Do you know what the Covenant of the Jews actually is?
Nice dodge.
Nice demonstration of ignorance.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
Where does Paul say in the above verse that Jews are people like him?
HINT: Nowhere.
It's your interpretation not mine.
Paul says it nowhere - so you have no argument.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I know more about Christian doctrine than you do about Judaism.
That is false - you already proved you know nothing of Christian doctrine.
And do you know anything at all about Judaism?
I know it's a religion.
Right.
But you don't know what Christianity is.
Of course I do - Christianity is a religion based on the life and
teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as presented in the Greek Testament. I
know something of the doctrines of resurrection, some of the ethics and
the approach to being saved.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
I may not know much about your particular beliefs, but I think that your
variety of Christianity is so far out of the mainstream
Paul's teachings are out of mainstream Christianity? You are clearly dazed
and confused.
No, but your interpretation may very well be.
I don't need to interpret Rom 2:28-29 - I simply believe it on its face value.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This says nothing about the only Jews following Jesus.
So what? It says nothing about the price of coffee in Brazil, either.
You conveniently snipped the portion of this correspondence that
includes your interpretion of the text.

This comes from your posting of 9/1/2005, 9:41 PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
...but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.

Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
______________________________________________________________________________________

It says nothing about Jews following Jesus being real Jews. You
interpret it that way.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Do you have respectable
backing for what you assert?
Paul the apostle is more than respectable backing.
He might be, but you cannot provide any respectable backing for your
interpretation of what he said.
That is a false construct - I have interpreted nothing.
Any time anyone explains a quote, they are interpreting it.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Perhaps a better example for you would be dead people. Do dead people
perform actions - or not perform actions?
Dead people are dead, so they cannot perform actions.
What's the point?
In John 11 Lazarus was dead - but when Jesus raised him to life he believed.
That's not unknown. I had a professor who became a Christian Scientist
when his mother recovered under the care of a Healer after medical
science couldn't cure her.
The fact remains - a dead person cannot perform actions. Lazarus was a
dead person who could not perform actions because his faith was dead - and
that is the point.
Right. But
your earlier quotes stated that no action is required
You are a liar - I never stated no action is required.
See below. You deny it, but dishonestly snip my direct quotes. That's
not an argument. That's a sleazy and dishonest attempt to assert that
you are right by ignoring the arguments against you. It's particularly
bad in this case because your very words give you the lie.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You assert that belief is not an action.
Liar.
You lie. And you compound the lie by clipping direct quotes of you
making that assertion.

First, this one, dated 9/1/05 3:59 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
ROB
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you
can do on your own.
______________________________________________________________________________________

You explicitly state that belief is not an action.

Here's another one 9/1/05 9:41 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Having faith is action, believing is action.
ROB
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an
action - but it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with
uplifted hands to receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven -
whereas believing is the action of eating that Bread of Life.
______________________________________________________________________________________


You are clearly asserting that belief is not an action. Let's see
whether you can respond without dishonestly snipping these direct quotes.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Lazarus' faith was dead until he was brought to life - and only then could he
perform the action of believing - and this is precisely the reason why James
says "faith without actions is dead".
James 2:17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by
action, is dead. (NIV)
So now you contradict yourself. On 9/1/2005 at 11:53 PDT you said
You can rationalize it however you wish - but your rationalization does not
change the fact that James says faith without action is dead. Lazarus had
faith but it was a dead faith - but his dead faith was transformed into a
living faith once Jesus resurrected him.
So he does, but you state that action is not necessary, only belief and
waiting for salvation to drop from heaven into your upturned hands. And
you assert that those are not actions. So your belief is devoid of
action. You dishonestly snipped my response to your request for a quote.
I've noticed you do that only when I'm right. That's dishonest on your
part, but I'm not surprised.
You're being childish - again.
Whenever an effective argument is mounted against you, you resort to
dishonest snipping and snide remarks. You can't make a real case for
yourself.
Rob
2005-09-05 16:48:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This says nothing about the only Jews following Jesus.
So what? It says nothing about the price of coffee in Brazil, either.
You conveniently snipped the portion of this correspondence that
includes your interpretion of the text.
This comes from your posting of 9/1/2005, 9:41 PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
...but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
______________________________________________________________________________________
It says nothing about Jews following Jesus being real Jews.
Your comment is equivalent to proof-texting - which again proves you
have no argument.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Paul the apostle is more than respectable backing.
He might be, but you cannot provide any respectable backing for your
interpretation of what he said.
That is a false construct - I have interpreted nothing.
Any time anyone explains a quote, they are interpreting it.
My point remains - I have interpreted nothing.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
The fact remains - a dead person cannot perform actions. Lazarus was a
dead person who could not perform actions because his faith was dead - and
that is the point.
Right. But
your earlier quotes stated that no action is required
You are a liar - I never stated no action is required.
See below. You deny it, but dishonestly snip my direct quotes. That's
not an argument. That's a sleazy and dishonest attempt to assert that
you are right by ignoring the arguments against you. It's particularly
bad in this case because your very words give you the lie.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You assert that belief is not an action.
Liar.
You lie. And you compound the lie by clipping direct quotes of you
making that assertion.
First, this one, dated 9/1/05 3:59 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
Post by Rob
Post by Rob
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
Nowhere in the above quote do I say "belief is not an action" - and I don't
even use the word "action" - so you failed.
Post by cactus
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
ROB
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you
can do on your own.
Again - the word "action" is not there - so you failed - again.
Post by cactus
______________________________________________________________________________________
You explicitly state that belief is not an action.
Here's another one 9/1/05 9:41 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Having faith is action, believing is action.
ROB
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an
action - but it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with
uplifted hands to receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven -
whereas believing is the action of eating that Bread of Life.
You claim I "explicitly state" that "belief is not an action" - but anyone who
is not brain dead can clearly see that nowhere in the above quotes do I even
use the word "action". So you have only proved yourself to be the liar - thank
you for that.

Rob
cactus
2005-09-05 19:11:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This says nothing about the only Jews following Jesus.
So what? It says nothing about the price of coffee in Brazil, either.
You conveniently snipped the portion of this correspondence that
includes your interpretion of the text.
This comes from your posting of 9/1/2005, 9:41 PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
...but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
______________________________________________________________________________________
It says nothing about Jews following Jesus being real Jews.
Your comment is equivalent to proof-texting - which again proves you
have no argument.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Paul the apostle is more than respectable backing.
He might be, but you cannot provide any respectable backing for your
interpretation of what he said.
That is a false construct - I have interpreted nothing.
Any time anyone explains a quote, they are interpreting it.
My point remains - I have interpreted nothing.
Believe as you wish, but you would make a lousy lawyer and a worse
theologian.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
The fact remains - a dead person cannot perform actions. Lazarus was a
dead person who could not perform actions because his faith was dead - and
that is the point.
Right. But
your earlier quotes stated that no action is required
You are a liar - I never stated no action is required.
See below. You deny it, but dishonestly snip my direct quotes. That's
not an argument. That's a sleazy and dishonest attempt to assert that
you are right by ignoring the arguments against you. It's particularly
bad in this case because your very words give you the lie.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You assert that belief is not an action.
Liar.
You lie. And you compound the lie by clipping direct quotes of you
making that assertion.
First, this one, dated 9/1/05 3:59 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
Post by Rob
Post by Rob
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
Nowhere in the above quote do I say "belief is not an action" - and I don't
even use the word "action" - so you failed.
Post by cactus
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
ROB
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you
can do on your own.
Again - the word "action" is not there - so you failed - again.
Post by cactus
______________________________________________________________________________________
You explicitly state that belief is not an action.
Here's another one 9/1/05 9:41 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Having faith is action, believing is action.
ROB
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an
action - but it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with
uplifted hands to receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven -
whereas believing is the action of eating that Bread of Life.
You claim I "explicitly state" that "belief is not an action" - but anyone who
is not brain dead can clearly see that nowhere in the above quotes do I even
use the word "action". So you have only proved yourself to be the liar - thank
you for that.
You snipped again before denying what I said. You are giving Christians
a bad name with your sleazy behavior. Even jw doesn't do that. Maybe you
are Pastor Dave's alter (or altar) ego?

But, if you insist, you have a choice:
Either you believe without action, so your faith is dead,
or you believe actively which makes you a member of the Christian faith.

Your choice.
Rob
2005-09-05 21:28:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This says nothing about the only Jews following Jesus.
So what? It says nothing about the price of coffee in Brazil, either.
You conveniently snipped the portion of this correspondence that
includes your interpretion of the text.
This comes from your posting of 9/1/2005, 9:41 PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
...but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
______________________________________________________________________________________
It says nothing about Jews following Jesus being real Jews.
Your comment is equivalent to proof-texting - which again proves you
have no argument.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Paul the apostle is more than respectable backing.
He might be, but you cannot provide any respectable backing for your
interpretation of what he said.
That is a false construct - I have interpreted nothing.
Any time anyone explains a quote, they are interpreting it.
My point remains - I have interpreted nothing.
Believe as you wish,
The idea of "believe as you wish" is a concept contrary to what Paul the
apostle taught - and therefore it is contrary to Christian doctrine.
Post by cactus
but you would make a lousy lawyer and a worse theologian.
You speak for yourself - not me. Everything I stated is validated by the
doctrine of the New Testament.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You assert that belief is not an action.
Liar.
You lie. And you compound the lie by clipping direct quotes of you
making that assertion.
First, this one, dated 9/1/05 3:59 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
Post by Rob
Post by Rob
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
Nowhere in the above quote do I say "belief is not an action" - and I don't
even use the word "action" - so you failed.
Post by cactus
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
ROB
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you
can do on your own.
Again - the word "action" is not there - so you failed - again.
Post by cactus
______________________________________________________________________________________
You explicitly state that belief is not an action.
Here's another one 9/1/05 9:41 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Having faith is action, believing is action.
ROB
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an
action - but it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with
uplifted hands to receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven -
whereas believing is the action of eating that Bread of Life.
You claim I "explicitly state" that "belief is not an action" - but anyone who
is not brain dead can clearly see that nowhere in the above quotes do I even
use the word "action". So you have only proved yourself to be the liar - thank
you for that.
You snipped again before denying what I said.
So what? You simply parroted the same lie of falsely accusing me of stating
that "belief is not action". If you want to repost your lie - be my guest.
Post by cactus
You are giving Christians a bad name with your sleazy behavior.
That is only your opinion which is laughable - as it's abundantly obvious that
you haven't the faintest clue of what a Christian is.
Post by cactus
Either you believe without action, so your faith is dead,
Whether or not a person believes was not the issue - the issue was
your claim that simply having faith denotes action. I reiterate - that is
a false construct because having faith in and of itself is not an action.
Lazarus' faith had no action before Christ resurrected him - and that
is because his faith was dead. Do you got it now? Or is it still too arcane
for you? I bet the latter.

Rob
cactus
2005-09-05 23:43:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This says nothing about the only Jews following Jesus.
So what? It says nothing about the price of coffee in Brazil, either.
You conveniently snipped the portion of this correspondence that
includes your interpretion of the text.
This comes from your posting of 9/1/2005, 9:41 PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
...but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
______________________________________________________________________________________
It says nothing about Jews following Jesus being real Jews.
Your comment is equivalent to proof-texting - which again proves you
have no argument.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Paul the apostle is more than respectable backing.
He might be, but you cannot provide any respectable backing for your
interpretation of what he said.
That is a false construct - I have interpreted nothing.
Any time anyone explains a quote, they are interpreting it.
My point remains - I have interpreted nothing.
Believe as you wish,
The idea of "believe as you wish" is a concept contrary to what Paul the
apostle taught - and therefore it is contrary to Christian doctrine.
Post by cactus
but you would make a lousy lawyer and a worse theologian.
You speak for yourself - not me. Everything I stated is validated by the
doctrine of the New Testament.
Your version anyway.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You assert that belief is not an action.
Liar.
You lie. And you compound the lie by clipping direct quotes of you
making that assertion.
First, this one, dated 9/1/05 3:59 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
Post by Rob
Post by Rob
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
Nowhere in the above quote do I say "belief is not an action" - and I don't
even use the word "action" - so you failed.
Post by cactus
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
ROB
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you
can do on your own.
Again - the word "action" is not there - so you failed - again.
Post by cactus
______________________________________________________________________________________
You explicitly state that belief is not an action.
Here's another one 9/1/05 9:41 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Having faith is action, believing is action.
ROB
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an
action - but it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with
uplifted hands to receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven -
whereas believing is the action of eating that Bread of Life.
You claim I "explicitly state" that "belief is not an action" - but anyone who
is not brain dead can clearly see that nowhere in the above quotes do I even
use the word "action". So you have only proved yourself to be the liar - thank
you for that.
You snipped again before denying what I said.
So what? You simply parroted the same lie of falsely accusing me of stating
that "belief is not action". If you want to repost your lie - be my guest.
I'm not going to bother any more. I've posted it 3 times and you've
snipped it 3 times. That's a game I no longer choose to play. Since you
cannot refute my argument without erasing it, you lose.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You are giving Christians a bad name with your sleazy behavior.
That is only your opinion which is laughable - as it's abundantly obvious that
you haven't the faintest clue of what a Christian is.
A real one? I've encountered them here. You are not among them because
of your arrogant intolerance and dishonest debating tactics.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Either you believe without action, so your faith is dead,
Whether or not a person believes was not the issue - the issue was
your claim that simply having faith denotes action. I reiterate - that is
a false construct because having faith in and of itself is not an action.
Lazarus' faith had no action before Christ resurrected him - and that
is because his faith was dead. Do you got it now? Or is it still too arcane
for you? I bet the latter.
Right. So you believe, but don't take action. Your faith is dead faith. QED.
Rob
2005-09-06 05:08:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
This says nothing about the only Jews following Jesus.
So what? It says nothing about the price of coffee in Brazil, either.
You conveniently snipped the portion of this correspondence that
includes your interpretion of the text.
This comes from your posting of 9/1/2005, 9:41 PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
...but Paul the
apostle makes clear the only people who are really Jews are the ones who
have faith in Christ per the following.
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. {29} He is a Jew who is
one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual
and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God. (RSV)
______________________________________________________________________________________
It says nothing about Jews following Jesus being real Jews.
Your comment is equivalent to proof-texting - which again proves you
have no argument.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Paul the apostle is more than respectable backing.
He might be, but you cannot provide any respectable backing for your
interpretation of what he said.
That is a false construct - I have interpreted nothing.
Any time anyone explains a quote, they are interpreting it.
My point remains - I have interpreted nothing.
Believe as you wish,
The idea of "believe as you wish" is a concept contrary to what Paul the
apostle taught - and therefore it is contrary to Christian doctrine.
Post by cactus
but you would make a lousy lawyer and a worse theologian.
You speak for yourself - not me. Everything I stated is validated by the
doctrine of the New Testament.
Your version anyway.
You have miserably failed to prove otherwise - so my version stands.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You assert that belief is not an action.
Liar.
You lie. And you compound the lie by clipping direct quotes of you
making that assertion.
First, this one, dated 9/1/05 3:59 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
Post by Rob
Post by Rob
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
Nowhere in the above quote do I say "belief is not an action" - and I don't
even use the word "action" - so you failed.
Post by cactus
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
ROB
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you
can do on your own.
Again - the word "action" is not there - so you failed - again.
Post by cactus
______________________________________________________________________________________
You explicitly state that belief is not an action.
Here's another one 9/1/05 9:41 PM PDT
______________________________________________________________________________________
CACTUS
Post by Rob
Having faith is action, believing is action.
ROB
That is a false construct. Having faith in and of itself is not an
action - but it is simply the empty hands of a beggar on the street with
uplifted hands to receive the Bread of Life that came down from heaven -
whereas believing is the action of eating that Bread of Life.
You claim I "explicitly state" that "belief is not an action" - but anyone who
is not brain dead can clearly see that nowhere in the above quotes do I even
use the word "action". So you have only proved yourself to be the liar - thank
you for that.
You snipped again before denying what I said.
So what? You simply parroted the same lie of falsely accusing me of stating
that "belief is not action". If you want to repost your lie - be my guest.
I'm not going to bother any more. I've posted it 3 times and you've
snipped it 3 times.
That's a game I no longer choose to play.
There's no need - you already proved you're a liar.
Post by cactus
Since you cannot refute my argument
You have no argument - so there's nothing to refute.
Post by cactus
without erasing it,
you lose.
Only in your personal little Disney World - I'm happy for you.
Post by cactus
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
You are giving Christians a bad name with your sleazy behavior.
That is only your opinion which is laughable - as it's abundantly obvious that
you haven't the faintest clue of what a Christian is.
A real one? I've encountered them here. You are not among them because
of your arrogant intolerance and dishonest debating tactics.
Post by Rob
Post by cactus
Either you believe without action, so your faith is dead,
Whether or not a person believes was not the issue - the issue was
your claim that simply having faith denotes action. I reiterate - that is
a false construct because having faith in and of itself is not an action.
Lazarus' faith had no action before Christ resurrected him - and that
is because his faith was dead. Do you got it now? Or is it still too arcane
for you? I bet the latter.
Right. So you believe, but don't take action.
It's a good thing I bet the latter.
Post by cactus
Your faith is dead faith. QED.
Uh huh - and I sold the Hope Diamond on ebay, too. Q.E.D.

Rob
Mike Andrade
2005-09-01 21:13:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
--
Mike
God writes a lot of comedy... the trouble is, he's stuck with so many
bad actors who don't know how to play funny. - Garrison Keillor
Rob
2005-09-01 22:59:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.

John 6:44 The Father is the One who sent me. No one can come to me unless the
Father draws him to me, and I will raise that person up on the last day. (NCV)

Eph 2:8-9 I mean that you have been saved by grace through believing. You did
not save yourselves; it was a gift from God. {9} It was not the result of your
own efforts, so you cannot brag about it. (NCV)

Rob
maf1029 (©2001-2008)
2005-09-01 23:38:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling, Mary. You'll hurt yourself.
And when you prove that this "Jesus" person/being is actively helping
people acquire belief in him/it in a tangible, observable way, then
you'll have a valid, believable point.
Until then, there is no sane reason to believe in your fantasy
character just because you say so. And Christianity is still a
religion, whether it's believed in and/or worshipped by one person or
many.
And what is your damage? Who the f*ck cares if you have a religion or
not? Or is that part of your "Atheism is a religion and atheists are
eeeevil" schtick?

<snip spell casting from Grimoire of Incest, Gore, and Death>
Rob
2005-09-02 04:41:07 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:38:20 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling,
Where?

Rob
maf1029 (©2001-2008)
2005-09-02 05:52:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:38:20 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling,Mary.
Where?
You just wrote it.
And just a reminder -- Christianity is still a religion, whether it's
practiced or believed by one person, many people, or just you.
Rob
2005-09-02 15:58:44 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:52:52 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:38:20 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling,Mary.
Where?
You just wrote it.
Not.

Rob
maf1029 (©2001-2008)
2005-09-03 03:02:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:52:52 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:38:20 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling,Mary.
Where?
You just wrote it.
Not.
Lying for Jesus is a no-no in your <drum roll> *****RELIGION*****.

"....believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do on your
own."

That was your backpedaling, Mary. You wrote it, then you lied about
writing it. Live with it, while you contemplate your <drum roll>
*****RELIGION***** on Sunday morning. (Saturday if you're a 7th
Day-er)
Rob
2005-09-03 03:21:46 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 20:02:38 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:52:52 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:38:20 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling,Mary.
Where?
You just wrote it.
Not.
Lying for Jesus is a no-no in your <drum roll> *****RELIGION*****.
"....believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do on your
own."
That was your backpedaling,
Okay - you're stupid. What else you got?

Rob
maf1029 (©2001-2008)
2005-09-03 03:29:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 20:02:38 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:52:52 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:38:20 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling,Mary.
Where?
You just wrote it.
Not.
Lying for Jesus is a no-no in your <drum roll> *****RELIGION*****.
"....believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do on your
own."
That was your backpedaling,
Okay -
Thanks for conceding the argument.
Post by Rob
you're stupid.
Apparently less so than you, Lord Moron.
Enjoy your <drum roll> *****RELIGION*****
of Christianity, as it continues to rot your brain.

What else ya got? How 'bout casting some spells from your Grimoire of
Incest and Death?
Daniel Hoehr
2005-09-03 09:23:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 20:02:38 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:52:52 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:38:20 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling,Mary.
Where?
You just wrote it.
Not.
Lying for Jesus is a no-no in your <drum roll> *****RELIGION*****.
"....believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do on your
own."
That was your backpedaling,
Okay -
Thanks for conceding the argument.
Post by Rob
you're stupid.
Apparently less so than you, Lord Moron.
Enjoy your <drum roll> *****RELIGION*****
of Christianity, as it continues to rot your brain.
What else ya got? How 'bout casting some spells from your Grimoire of
Incest and Death?
More examples of unattractive / ugly behaviour.

DH
Daniel Hoehr
2005-09-03 09:22:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:52:52 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:38:20 -0700, "maf1029 (©2001-2008)"
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling,Mary.
Where?
You just wrote it.
Not.
Lying for Jesus is a no-no in your <drum roll> *****RELIGION*****.
"....believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do on your
own."
Which is a correct statement.
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
That was your backpedaling, Mary.
It was right on.

<snip examples for unatractive / ugly conduct>

DH
Daniel Hoehr
2005-09-02 10:12:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by maf1029 (©2001-2008)
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that a
person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not something you can do
on your own.
Easy on the backpedaling, Mary. You'll hurt yourself.
And when you prove that this "Jesus" person/being is actively helping
people acquire belief in him/it in a tangible, observable way, then
you'll have a valid, believable point.
Only that Rob never said that Jesus is "actively helping" people to
"acquire belief".

[...]

DH
Mike Andrade
2005-09-01 23:54:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that
a person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not
something you can do on your own.
Then no one can be held accountable for /not/ believing.
Post by Rob
John 6:44 The Father is the One who sent me. No one can come to me
unless the Father draws him to me, and I will raise that person up
on the last day. (NCV)
Then sending people to hell for not believing is capricious and
unjust.
Post by Rob
Eph 2:8-9 I mean that you have been saved by grace through
believing. You did not save yourselves; it was a gift from God.
{9} It was not the result of your own efforts, so you cannot brag
about it. (NCV)
Unless God gives this gift to everyone, sending anyone to hell is an
act of evil.
--
Mike
God writes a lot of comedy... the trouble is, he's stuck with so many
bad actors who don't know how to play funny. - Garrison Keillor
Rob
2005-09-02 04:41:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates that
a person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to inherit
eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not
something you can do on your own.
Then no one can be held accountable for /not/ believing.
Post by Rob
John 6:44 The Father is the One who sent me. No one can come to me
unless the Father draws him to me, and I will raise that person up
on the last day. (NCV)
Then sending people to hell for not believing is capricious and
unjust.
I'm not God - so why are you whining to me?

Rob
Mike Andrade
2005-09-02 13:42:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates
that a person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to
inherit eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not
something you can do on your own.
Then no one can be held accountable for /not/ believing.
Post by Rob
John 6:44 The Father is the One who sent me. No one can come to
me unless the Father draws him to me, and I will raise that
person up on the last day. (NCV)
Then sending people to hell for not believing is capricious and
unjust.
I'm not God - so why are you whining to me?
So you don't mind worshipping a capricious and unjust god? Ok.
--
Mike
You and I do not see things as they are. We see things as we are.
- Herb Cohen
Rob
2005-09-02 15:58:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates
that a person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order to
inherit eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not
something you can do on your own.
Then no one can be held accountable for /not/ believing.
Post by Rob
John 6:44 The Father is the One who sent me. No one can come to
me unless the Father draws him to me, and I will raise that
person up on the last day. (NCV)
Then sending people to hell for not believing is capricious and
unjust.
I'm not God - so why are you whining to me?
So you don't mind worshipping a capricious and unjust god? Ok.
That beef is between you and God - so why are you still whining to me?

Rob
Mike Andrade
2005-09-02 19:42:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 21:13:21 GMT, Mike Andrade
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates
that a person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order
to inherit eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not
something you can do on your own.
Then no one can be held accountable for /not/ believing.
John 6:44 The Father is the One who sent me. No one can come
to me unless the Father draws him to me, and I will raise that
person up on the last day. (NCV)
Then sending people to hell for not believing is capricious and
unjust.
I'm not God - so why are you whining to me?
So you don't mind worshipping a capricious and unjust god? Ok.
That beef is between you and God - so why are you still whining to me?
Ok, let's review: You begin by making a silly claim. When logical
flaws are pointed out, rather than address the points made, you reply
with "why are you whining?"

Gotcha.

It appears you worship a thing created in your own image. Good luck
with that.
--
Mike
"I am not a glutton - I am an explorer of food."
- Erma Bombeck
Rob
2005-09-02 21:56:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 21:13:21 GMT, Mike Andrade
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel dictates
that a person must simply believe in Jesus Christ in order
to inherit eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not
something you can do on your own.
Then no one can be held accountable for /not/ believing.
John 6:44 The Father is the One who sent me. No one can come
to me unless the Father draws him to me, and I will raise that
person up on the last day. (NCV)
Then sending people to hell for not believing is capricious and
unjust.
I'm not God - so why are you whining to me?
So you don't mind worshipping a capricious and unjust god? Ok.
That beef is between you and God - so why are you still whining to me?
Ok, let's review: You begin by making a silly claim. When logical
flaws are pointed out, rather than address the points made, you reply
with "why are you whining?"
Take a look at yourself - all you do is carp and whine - the only thing you
need now is some cheese and crackers and your life will be fulfilled.

Rob
Mike Andrade
2005-09-03 00:50:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
Post by Mike Andrade
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 23:54:30 GMT, Mike Andrade
Post by Mike Andrade
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 21:13:21 GMT, Mike Andrade
Post by Mike Andrade
Post by Rob
A religion by definition dictates that a person must
"do something" - whereas the message of the Gospel
dictates that a person must simply believe in Jesus Christ
in order to inherit eternal life.
"believe in Jesus Christ" is equivalent to "do something."
No - it is not - because believing in Jesus Christ is not
something you can do on your own.
Then no one can be held accountable for /not/ believing.
John 6:44 The Father is the One who sent me. No one can come
to me unless the Father draws him to me, and I will raise
that person up on the last day. (NCV)
Then sending people to hell for not believing is capricious
and unjust.
I'm not God - so why are you whining to me?
So you don't mind worshipping a capricious and unjust god? Ok.
That beef is between you and God - so why are you still whining to me?
Ok, let's review: You begin by making a silly claim. When
logical flaws are pointed out, rather than address the points
made, you reply with "why are you whining?"
Take a look at yourself - all you do is carp and whine - the only
thing you need now is some cheese and crackers and your life will
be fulfilled.
I'm sorry, did you sneeze?
--
Mike
You know how dumb the average guy is? Well, by definition, half of
them are even dumber than that. - J.R. 'Bob' Dobbs
Mike Andrade
2005-08-31 21:27:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Why is is that you are so adamant about your religion, yet lack
respect for the traditions and histories of other faiths?
It's called insecurity.
--
Mike
By all means marry; if you get a good wife, you'll be happy. If you get
a bad one, you'll become a philosopher. - Socrates
Twonky <host of YHVH Tzva'ot>
2005-08-30 13:54:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Muffin
Post by IKnowHimDoYou- A.
Atheism is a Religion
NOPE
No it is not. Not without altering the definition of the word "religion"
So it can be a religion.
Post by Muffin
belief
loyalty
faith
grace
freedom
spirit
compassion
study
How do they alter them? Can you give at least three eXamples?
Post by Muffin
and even "LOVE"
And they worship a man. They're as wrong as the Jews. "Back then".
And today. No fricken difference.

The word "God" has to be taken out of Scripture. And the name HaShem.
and His titles, the Most High, Almighty God. Put back into it.

The zealots (in any belief system) can't alter...

HaShem.....
Creation....
Male....
Female....
Cain.....
Cro-Magnon........
Neandertal.....
Seth.....
Lust......
Fuhking....
Suhking......
Inbreeding.....
Perversion.....
Arc.....
~~~~~~~~~~
Land.....
-----------------
Noah....
Wfe....
Sons....
Shem...
Ham...
Japheth.....
Wives.......
Abram....
Hagar....
Angel
Ishmael....
Princes....
Almighty.....
Abraham.....
Sarah.....
Isaac.....
Kings.....
Jesus......

<geddit?>

(Pretty good case. Don't you think?)

What year is this, Muffin? After whom?
m***@yahoo.com
2005-09-07 14:27:57 UTC
Permalink
Atheism,a religion?
A religion is meant for people hu have a weak mind and character (Hey
theists dont get offended ok).But i believe atheists are not like
that.But whtevr u say buddy all i wud lik te tell u is ther is sumpin
calld God n U see Him evryday
He is none other than ...............
U can guess it rite? cant u fello atheist.
Luk
A concerned earthling
John Baker
2005-09-08 01:31:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@yahoo.com
Atheism,a religion?
A religion is meant for people hu have a weak mind and character (Hey
theists dont get offended ok).But i believe atheists are not like
that.But whtevr u say buddy all i wud lik te tell u is ther is sumpin
calld God n U see Him evryday
He is none other than ...............
U can guess it rite? cant u fello atheist.
Luk
A concerned earthling
Nice try, dude, but real atheists know how to spell. <G>
m***@yahoo.com
2005-09-08 06:44:07 UTC
Permalink
yeah buddy john
wish atheists cud spell it rite.infact even i dont deny d fact tht ther
is God
luk
vipin
VO
2005-09-08 15:06:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@yahoo.com
Atheism,a religion?
A religion is meant for people hu have a weak mind and character
Quite true.

Religion is not a synonym for theism.

An atheist need not be religious.
A Theist need not be religious
Organized groups of Atheists practice a religion.

Yep, weak mind. Very weak, no life.

Loading...