Jezebel versus Yehu, yesterday and today?

[Polymath257]

*** Moderation Post****

Please be aware of Rules 1 and 3:

1. Personal Comments About Members and Staff
Personal attacks and name-calling, whether direct or in the third person, are strictly prohibited on the forums. Critique each other's ideas all you want, but under no circumstances personally attack each other or the staff. Quoting a member's post in a separate/new thread without their permission to challenge or belittle them, or harassing staff members for performing moderation duties, will also be considered a personal attack.

3. Trolling and Bullying
Where Rule 1 covers personal attacks, Rule 3 governs other behaviors and content that can generally be described as being a jerk. Unacceptable behaviors and content include:

1) Content (whether words or images) that most people would find needlessly offensive, especially when such content is posted just to get a rise out of somebody and/or is not part of a reasoned argument.

2) Defamation, slander, or misrepresentation of a member's beliefs/arguments, or that of a particular group, culture, or religion. This includes altering the words of another member to change their meaning when using the quote feature.

3) Antagonism, bullying, or harassment - including but not limited to personal attacks, slander, and misrepresentation - of a member across multiple content areas of the forums. Repeatedly targeting or harassing members of particular groups will also be considered bullying.

 

[2ndpillar]

Do you want to be a little more specific?

 

[2ndpillar]

So then all prayers go unanswered, since none are without sin according to your own book.

Sorry, but the NT was published by the “daughter of Babylon”, the Roman church, who does not represent my views. It is a combination of the “tare seed” and the “good seed”. One needs to sift out the wheat from the chaff. As for “none are without sin”, I guess that is where “repentance” comes in, whereas one is supposed to turn from sin. The “Christian” community, and apparently you, embrace sin, and see no reason to turn away from it. And yeah, pretty much all of their prayers, and yours, go unanswered. You might as well save you breath

 

[Father Heathen]

Sorry, but the NT was published by the “daughter of Babylon”, the Roman church, who does not represent my views. It is a combination of the “tare seed” and the “good seed”. One needs to sift out the wheat from the chaff. As for “none are without sin”, I guess that is where “repentance” comes in, whereas one is supposed to turn from sin. The “Christian” community, and apparently you, embrace sin, and see no reason to turn away from it. And yeah, pretty much all of their prayers, and yours, go unanswered. You might as well save you breath

If I haven't make it clear before, the primitive superstitions of ancient goat herders mean absolutely nothing to me, regardless of who's wacky adaptation you've arbitrarily embraced.

 

[2ndpillar]

If I haven't make it clear before, the primitive superstitions of ancient goat herders mean absolutely nothing to me, regardless of who's wacky adaptation you've arbitrarily embraced.

And yet, you claim to "pray for me". Are you praying to Bel, or the goat in the backyard?

 

[Father Heathen]

And yet, you claim to "pray for me". Are you praying to Bel, or the goat in the backyard?

I was being sarcastic. But that aside, believing in the bible isn't a prerequisite for believing in god. The concept isn't exclusive to Abrahamic faiths.

 

[2ndpillar]

I was being sarcastic. But that aside, believing in the bible isn't a prerequisite for being in god. The concept isn't exclusive to Abrahamic faiths.

I am not up on the Abrahamic faiths "being in god" concept. Maybe you could clue me in?

 

[Father Heathen]

I am not up on the Abrahamic faiths "being in god" concept. Maybe you could clue me in?

It was a typo that I've corrected.

 

[2ndpillar]

I was being sarcastic. But that aside, believing in the bible isn't a prerequisite for believing in god. The concept isn't exclusive to Abrahamic faiths.

Yes of course, the Jews believed in the god Bel, and sacrificed children to the god Moloch, but that was not part of their original faith, that was a part of their rebellion, which wound up costing them dearly. And clearly, as stated in James, the demons also actually believe in God, yet it will do them no good.(James 2:19) What god do you believe in, and what good will he, she, or it do for you?

 

[Father Heathen]

Yes of course, the Jews believed in the god Bel, and sacrificed children to the god Moloch, but that was not part of their original faith, that was a part of their rebellion, which wound up costing them dearly. And clearly, as stated in James, the demons also actually believe in God, yet it will do them no good.(James 2:19) What god do you believe in, and what good will he, she, or it do for you?

There are thousands of different religions with their own gods, or rather their own perception/portrayal of god. What humans think they know of god is merely empty speculation and unfounded presumption shaped by their own cultures, emotions, and ego.

 

[2ndpillar]

There are thousands of different religions with their own gods, or rather their own perception/portrayal of god. What humans think they know of god is merely empty speculation and unfounded presumption shaped by their own cultures, emotions, and ego.

As you apparently express your religion as ""Agnostic Panendeism", I would have to think you aren't sure what you believe, which is probably common among others of the Agnostic Panendeism persuasion. Myself, I keep a health distance from religions.

 

[Father Heathen]

Myself, I keep a health distance from religions.

Neither agnosticism or panendeism are religions (they have no tenets), and if you actually believe that the bible is the infallible word of god, then you are very much submerged in religion.

 

[2ndpillar]

Neither agnosticism or panendeism are religions (they have no tenets), and if you actually believe that the bible is the infallible word of god, then you are very much submerged in religion.

You might want to inform whoever filled out your forum form with respect to your religion. I think the tenet of agnosticism, is that they have no tenets, and are just hanging in the wind. As for “panendeism”, the definition seems strange. You claim to be an agnostic, yet a panendeist seems to be a deist.

According to the panendeist website, any deist who believes that the universe is a part (but not the whole) of God can be considered a panendeist.

As for the “bible” being the infallible “word of god”, you haven’t read, or retained, much of what I have written.

 

[2ndpillar]

Neither agnosticism or panendeism are religions (they have no tenets), and if you actually believe that the bible is the infallible word of god, then you are very much submerged in religion.

You might want to inform whoever filled out your forum form with respect to your religion. I think the tenet of agnosticism, is that they have no tenets, and are just hanging in the wind. As for “panendeism”, the definition seems strange. You claim to be an agnostic, yet a panendeist seems to be a deist.

According to the panendeist website, any deist who believes that the universe is a part (but not the whole) of God can be considered a panendeist.

As for the “bible” being the infallible “word of god”, you haven’t read, or retained, much of what I have written.