IT'S ALL GOD'S FAULT !!

[2Dbunk]

It seems all one reads or sees in the news these days has to do with police shooting unarmed blacks for hardly felonious crimes. Yes, some are more serious than others, and most are just plain stupid.

But racial disparity is America's one big dirty secret (actually not a secret since our dirty linen is open for all to see and our adversaries cite it at every opportunity).

Please, can anyone tell me why it has to be this way. If God exists, why would "He" present us with this conundrum? Why would "He" lay such a burden upon a race (or races) of people that they can be subjugated, manipulated, enslaved, discriminated against, just because of their obvious difference in color?

If "He" exists, then it is on "Him" to explain "His" motive. It better be a good reason because as it stands now, more rational people are leaving the enclaves of the brain-washed, indoctrinated, superstitious, and unquestioning blind followers of Faith.

I await to hear ONE good reason for this unnecessary disparity.

[tam]

Peace to you DI, as always,

I appreciate you opinions Tam, but as far as I am concerned there is no possible way to rip Jesus out of this religion and pretend that he could somehow on his own two feet separate from it.

Why not? (not that my Lord Jaheshua stands apart from His Father, but from religion... why not?)

Because you wouldn't have a clue that some guy named Jesus ever existed if it wasn't for the religious doctrines that tell you what he supposedly had said.

If God and His Son did not exist, then your opinion here might be correct.

If God and His Son DO exist, then certainly we could know what His Son said without religion or doctrines or even the bible. In the same way the prophets received from the Word of God (Christ). He and God spoke to them.

Moreover, if Jesus wants to use the Gospels to spread his "WORDS" then it's entirely his responsibility to make certain those words are true and correct.

Who says He wants (or NEEDS) to use the gospels to spread His words? He said (in those gospels) that His sheep would hear His voice. He spoke to them after His death and resurrection and ascension, as the Spirit. He obviously did not need the 'gospels' to spread His words to those who are His sheep, who listen to His voice.

I mean, that is what those gospels clearly even show.


But men more often than not walk by sight; so the gospels are permitted and perhaps may help some to SEE and then begin to put their FAITH in what they HEAR from the Word of God (Christ Jaheshua).

(so that they may walk by FAITH, rather than by SIGHT).

Therefore Jesus has full responsibility for the religion of Christianity which claims to be teaching people what Jesus had supposedly said.

And yet, the religion often contradicts what HE said and what HE did and what HE teaches, even just according to what He is written to have said and done. They are showing that they did not get their teachings from Christ... not even from what He is written to have said and done.

You agree with this, if I recall correctly, because you have said as much to me in previous discussions, having seen and learned this back when you were yet a member of the religion.


Christ never told us to listen to men OR to form religions. You do remember the quote that I shared (in the previous post... you did not comment on it), that MANY will come to Him on that day and call Him Lord, and say to him that they did many things in His name, and yet He will say to them "Away from me, you evildoers. I never knew you."

You can't escape the religious aspect of it. Jesus would need to take responsibility for anything and everything that Christianity teaches IN HIS NAME.

Already responded to above and in my first response to you on this thread.

Jesus is nothing if not the Son of Yahweh.

Jaheshua, but yes... my Lord is the Son of Yahveh.

Well, there you go. Now not only does Jesus need to take responsibility for the entire content of New Testament, but Yahweh needs to take responsibility for the entire content of the Old Testament.

And yet BOTH of them warned us about the lying pen of the scribes. God warned through Jeremiah the prophet,

"How can you say, 'we are wise for we have the law of the LORD', when actually the LYING PEN OF THE SCRIBES has handled it FALSELY."

And Christ also warned us of this:

"Woe to you scribes and Pharisees!"

These characters can't be expecting people to know what they mean outside of what these texts claim these characters have said.

If they were mere characters, then again, your opinion might be correct.

If they are real beings, who live and who speak, then we should be listening to them. To the Word of God (Christ) who lives and who speaks and who promised to lead us into all truth.

Jesus has no authority to offer anyone eternal life if he's not the Son of Yahweh.

So my Lord is not apart from His Father; that does not mean that "Christendom" is from Him or from His Father.

But now you're talking about "Christendom", that's not "Christianity".

Christianity is the written doctrines (i.e. whatever is written in the Bible).

I have never in my life heard that as a definition of Christianity, DI. Who taught you that? Why do you ACCEPT that and believe THEM?

Far more importantly, Jesus would have nothing to offer people "salvation from" if not from the wrath and judgement of Yahweh.

He saves us from the wages of sin: death; and He reconciles us to His Father; and we have forgiveness in Him. No judgement.

There absolutely needs to be a 'judgment' that proclaims that a so-called 'sin' has even occurred before there could be forgiveness or salvation for having committed the so-called 'sin'.

Sin is error, DI. Wrongdoing also.

I don't know what definition you have received or who taught you it and why you believe them (and it), but sin is not that 'mysterious'.

I sin against someone else when I do them wrong (of any sort). I sin when I do wrong, itself. But there is also sin (error) in my flesh - hence the reason this flesh that we all have gets sick and eventually dies.

It sounds to me like you are in total denial regarding what this religion is even about.

I will admit that I do not know all of what some religion or another teaches. I have no desire to know these things either. But then, I am not supposed to be listening to them; I have not been part of them; I am meant to be listening to my Lord and to remain in HIM.

What's Jesus saving you from if not the wrath of Yahweh?

Death.

Who's threatening you with death?

Well, besides the occasional religious person (or various religions) that offer veiled threats of judgement... no one is threatening me with death. But surely you are not denying that death is something we are all subject to; that we all die?

You can't detach Jesus from this religion, nor can Jesus be used to create a stand-alone religion.

What religion? Why do you equate God with religion as if they are one and the same? The ONLY religion that God ever sanctioned was the Temple/priesthood given to Israel.

In that case, this God would be totally responsible for any failings in the Temple/priesthood of Israel, and according to this religious mythology that organization failed miserably. So that would be God's failure to maintain his Temple/priesthood.

Or people are free to listen to and follow Him... or not. But God DID send His Son to bear witness to the TRUTH, and the body of that Son IS the Temple. He sent prophets before my Lord as well, whenever the priesthood (and people) turned away, went astray, followed after other gods, etc.


But THIS topic is about what came after Christ, so I am going to stick with that.

"No one knows the Father except the Son, and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him."

You'll need to excuse me while I roll my eyes here.

I mean, seriously, all you are doing here is regurgitating the dogma of this religion just about verbatim.

No, all I am doing here is repeating the words my Lord spoke that others later recorded.

Just because someone or something uses His words to promote their religion and serve their OWN ends, does not mean that they had his direction or approval to do that.

God is the Father of Christ, and Christ is the Truth to whom God told us to come and to listen.

God never told anyone anything. All that exists are the "Holy Texts" of this religion that make proclamations in the name of this imaginary God.

If God were imaginary, then the OP is defeated, and what I wrote is true. It is man's fault, and not God's fault.


If God is real, then He can speak and tell people things. And He did speak against such things - through His Word (His Son) - and men did not listen. So still man's fault, and not God's fault.

And this brings this all right back to my point. If these "Holy Texts" actually belong to some God, then it's his job to maintain them and make sure they aren't abused.

Whether you like it or not, the God of this religion choose to use religion as his means of communication.

Maybe the 'god' of that 'religion' does this.

But the God and Father of Christ speaks to us through His Son (and Word), Christ Jaheshua.

Even those texts bear witness to this. So how can you ignore that in your argument?

Apparently you do not approve of this God's methods.

God does not need my approval.

Even so, I am most grateful for His methods. HIS methods though, as His Son has revealed.

Not the methods that men merely claim or ascribe to Him, including men who state outright that they do not know Him and that no one can know Him either.

Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

I'm sorry tammy, but from your posts it seems pretty clear that you are a slave to religion.

Considering I am not part of any religion, I find that this is an odd thing for you to 'see'.

I appreciate your concern, thank you, but it is unnecessary.

There is no "Christ".

There is a Christ.

Even if there was a Christ some 2000+ ago, all he left us with was a religion based on unreliable hearsay rumors about him. Rumors that even require that we accept and belief previous rumors from the Old Testament.

That is not what He left me (or any of His disciples and brothers) with. But that has been shared above.

At the very best, all you can really do is claim that Christianity is the religion started by Christ.

I cannot claim that at all because it is not true. The religion claims that though, and I guess you believe them?

To make any other claim doesn't even make any sense.

... to you.

You can't know Christ. All you can know is the hearsay rumors about him.

Period.

DI, you may be able speak for you. (even though that statement is in error)

But you cannot speak for me.

Period.

You can't even place your faith in Christ because he never wrote anything down. At best, all you can place your faith in is Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, Paul, or some other character who claims to speak on Christ's behave.

He did not have to write anything down. He knew that He would be alive to continue teaching and guiding His sheep into all truth.

And this brings it right back to my original point. If Christ isn't keeping all those guys in line, as well as any priests who claim to be teaching his WORD, then he's failing to keep his 'religion' in good order.

And yet, you continue to ignore the fact that He said to the MANY who will say to him, "Lord, Lord", and who said that they did many things in his name... "Away from me, you evildoers. I NEVER knew you."

He NEVER knew them.


Do you understand? If He NEVER knew them, how can you say that they are from Him?






Peace again to you, and to your household,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[ttruscott]

What is a single thing that he can be relied on to do?
No future unprovables, no past unprovables, what is God responsible for?

Unprovable - very nice little cave you live in eh? Unprovable, really ? in a system where proof is seldom on the table? This also puts you in the position of deciding what has been proven and what has not...

HE can be counted on to bring HIS sinful elect to sanctification and then bring the judgment. And this seems to be working just fine.

[dianaiad]

tam: I am at peace when I argue against nebulous claims of Faith. As a rational participant in life's discourse, it is presented to me as a nonsensical conundrum. I can walk away and dismiss it, or I can argue my concern for it. I have no recourse except to blame those who promote the God concept.

morefish: It's disgusting that you believe in such nonsense.

Overcomer: Whitewash !! Hogwash !!

tam: You miss the point. If God is omniscient then HE KNEW what he was creating -- no excuses needed !!

Moderator Comment

This post is a little confusing, formatted as it is, it looks as if you are quoting the posters named. If that is what you are doing, please provide the links to show that you have quoted them fairly and in context. If you are merely summing up what you think the positions of those posters are rather than attempting to quote them, add your own commentary so that the readers know what you are attempting to do.

Since you did not add your own commentary, this post looks like you are personally insulting and misrepresenting more than one poster.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]


And yet this supposedly 'disgusting' God allowed HIS ONLY SON to die on the cross to save your soul. . .Now isn't THAT DISGUSTING?

A man had to be brutally slain and hung up on a cross just so a god could offer us forgiveness and atonement. A HUMAN SACRIFICE that was completely unnecessary when it comes to ultimate forgiveness and atonement. This God set in motion a very barbaric and bloodthirsty process that didn't need to be so barbaric and bloodthirsty.

Yes, that is very disgusting indeed.

[imhereforyou]

It seems all one reads or sees in the news these days has to do with police shooting unarmed blacks for hardly felonious crimes. Yes, some are more serious than others, and most are just plain stupid.

But racial disparity is America's one big dirty secret (actually not a secret since our dirty linen is open for all to see and our adversaries cite it at every opportunity).

Please, can anyone tell me why it has to be this way. If God exists, why would "He" present us with this conundrum? Why would "He" lay such a burden upon a race (or races) of people that they can be subjugated, manipulated, enslaved, discriminated against, just because of their obvious difference in color?

If "He" exists, then it is on "Him" to explain "His" motive. It better be a good reason because as it stands now, more rational people are leaving the enclaves of the brain-washed, indoctrinated, superstitious, and unquestioning blind followers of Faith.

I await to hear ONE good reason for this unnecessary disparity.

Simply because God (or any god) would exist doesn't mean all these 'bad' or 'negative' things wouldn't exist.
The problem and God, or any god as a deity, is that we can't legitimately compare our ideals and concepts with its ideals and concepts, much less understand it.
Best we could hope for is a small understanding of a couple items this god provides to us and that this god doesn't squash us.
I don't buy anyone that says they understand, or we can understand, God or any god. To me, that's, at best, a pipe dream created by those who want to control the masses,

[ttruscott]

Please, can anyone tell me why it has to be this way. If God exists, why would "He" present us with this conundrum? Why would "He" lay such a burden upon a race (or races) of people that they can be subjugated, manipulated, enslaved, discriminated against, just because of their obvious difference in color?

GOD does not inflict sin upon us but allows us to sin to 1. open the eyes of those who can repent (the elect) to their need to repent and 2. to prove to the elect that there are some (non-elect) who cannot and never will repent. All sinfulness is divisive and divisiveness can and will take any and every form available.

No one is forced to sin and all sin that anyone does comes for their own desire to do something sinful whether it is racial discrimination or misogyny or any other sin.

All sin and evil in this world reflects the sin and evil in/of the people who live here. GOD's world is quite different: Revelation 21:4 He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death' or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away. and will arrive when the old order of things has passed away, that is, when no one is evil in this reality any more.

[ttruscott]

God doesn't play favourites. He loves everyone.

Actually, he does play favorites and doesn't love everyone:

Psalm 11:5 The LORD examines the righteous, but the wicked, those who love violence, he hates with a passion / abhors.

You are technically correct...but still wrong.

1.
HE hates the wicked but what about before they chose to be wicked? Was HE neutral, holding HIS emotional connections in abeyance or did HE love HIS creation only to have to turn against them once they ignored HIS warnings and chose to be evil?

2.
Remember too, MATTHEW 5:45 For He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. This clearly states that HE sends blessings (as well as calamities) upon even those HE hates, the unjust. How hateful is that?

It means that though HE has turned against them emotionally with an emotional reaction commensurate with the ultimate disvalue of the sin they have chosen to commit, HE still teats them with all the possible loving care that HE can. HIS hatred is legal but sending the rain and sun shows HIS caring attention motivated by love.

3.
The expression that GOD doesn't play favourites does not mean that HE treats everyone the same, but that HE treats everyone exactly with what they deserve - the sinful saints get no less suffering and the demons get no more suffering than they deserve: Rom 2:11 For God does not show favoritism. 12 All who sin apart from the Law will also perish apart from the Law, and all who sin under the Law will be judged by the Law.…

So while Overcomer may have given us the sound bite version, (just like you did), it is indeed correct.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 13 by JehovahsWitness]

Why do you always reference JW stuff?

If I understand the question you are asking is why I refer to JW ( Jehovah's Witness) "stuff".

ANSWER Because I'm one of Jehovah's Witnesses, my religion isn't just where I go on Sundays, it's the center of my world. When something is the centre of one's world you tend to talk about it a lot.

Can't you put things into your own words thoughts?

All my thoughts are my own, if I write someone else's thoughts I normally signal I'm doing so by using ---> "quotation marks " <--- they look like two little dashes. I'm usually careful to source my quotations.

Every one of your posts appears to be dogmatic proselytizing.

It is certainly is not my intention to appear dogmatic.

If you feel anything I write violates the forum rules feel free to bring this to the attention of the moderators; otherwise I do believe there is a mechanism on most electronic devices to skip a post and read elsewhere. It is also my personal belief that there is an "ignore" option available on this forum so that one doesn't have to see the posts by a particular poster at all if that is one's desire.

If you have anything else you would like to ask me feel free,

Regards

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

[help3434]

If God and His Son DO exist, then certainly we could know what His Son said without religion or doctrines or even the bible. In the same way the prophets received from the Word of God (Christ). He and God spoke to them.

It sounds like you are talking about people hearing voices in their head and attributing that to God or Christ. How else could anyone know what the Son supposedly said without reading the bible?

[help3434]

Christ never told us to listen to men OR to form religions.

The Gospels depicts Jesus ordaining the apostles and the seventy, being baptised and teaching its importance, and setting up the ordinance of the final structure. He then is resurrected and instructs his followers to spread the word. Later in the New Testament we see an organized Church system with a system for replacing apostles so they can continue to guide the religion, a property sharing system, and congregations with bishops at the head. Contrary to your assertion the New Testament depicts and advocates for organized religion.