The Truth About God.

[(Q)]

trueblood

And as for debating..Q and others like yourselves will make a statement or a denial but NEVER post any other works that might support your side.

I've not made any claims in which direct evidence is required. I've questioned the claims of others like yourself who have yet to provide any evidence.

If I've stated or denied something, it would be based on logic and rationale or probably just simple common knowledge.

Would you prefer I cited sources for common knowledge?

 

[(Q)]

Spiritual Son (Harry)

This is a forum for debate, not preaching. If you wish to preach to the masses, there are other forums here for that purpose.

This is not one of them.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

ONEWAY--

1. The Old Testament prophecies are often EXTREMELY vague...I'm very skeptical of any attempted measurement of the likelihood of fulfilling them.

Much of whether or not the New Testament fulfills the prophecies is based on
A) how much you trust the New Testament authors and the historicity of their writings. Let me point out that the authors contradict each other in numerous places on key points, and Matthew clearly has an agenda to write anything that will make Jesus appear to fulfill the prophesies even if it is inaccurate--the Catholic Church generally agrees with me here.

B) whether or not OT prophecies are meant metaphorically or literally

C) how much you trust the council of Constantine and subsequent translations and how they recorded the OT and New T. Also, as you've already admitted, the New Testament does not fulfill every prophecy. Now why would some prophesies be fulfilled and not others?

D) The assumption that Jesus was unaware of the prophecies or could not have purposely done/said things that he knew fulfilled them....this is a HUGE assumption.

2. I would not disagree that there is important knowledge of ancient civilizations to be gained from the Bible. However, the purpose of the authors in the Bible is spiritual truth, not historical or scientific truth. That is even the view of the Catholic Church.

Even if the philosophy of the New Testament is relatively consistent, the only thing that indicates is that a religious man named Jesus existed and that his followers accurately remember his general philosophy. This is not surprising, and has nothing to do with the historical reliability of the Bible.

The fact that the Hittites were mentioned in the Bible and were a real civilization means that the Bible was right about the Hittites--it doesn't give validity to the entire Bible though, because much of the Bible has already been shown to be factually inaccurate (though some of it like the names of places and people is accurate I agree--many dates are inaccurate though). Just because not everything was made up doesn't mean it's all accurate.

Here's one of MANY innaccuracies: The Gospel of Matthew says that Joseph's father is Jacob; Luke says Joseph's father is Heli.

3. I'm not sure what you're saying here...I thought Plato and Homer, for example, lived and died long before Jesus came around.

4. That doesn't prove the validity of the New Testament...just that many people copied it down. I'll bet if we lost all the copies, we could recontruct other ancient texts from other sources also.

5. Telling me that believing in Christianity is a choice would be like telling you that believing in Santa is a choice, and that not beleiving in Santa is a "bad choice". You may think the only way to be saved is to accept your religion....and millions of Muslims think the only way you can be saved is to accept THEIR religion. Once you realize the subjectivity of religious beliefs in general, perhaps you will be more open to healthy questioning of your own beleifs.....for only through questioning can one's faith grow.

 

[SpiritualSon]

The spiritual sense is in all things of the Word, and in every single particular of it. This cannot be better seen than by examples, such as the following. John says in Revelation:
I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse, and He that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns, and He had a name written that no man knew but He Himself, and He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood, and His name is called the Word of God. And His armies in heaven followed Him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And He hath on His vesture and on His thigh a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords. And I saw an angel standing in the sun, and he cried with a loud voice, Come and gather yourselves together to the great supper, that ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, and small and great (Rev. 19:11-18).

What these things signify cannot be known except from the spiritual sense of the Word, and no one can know the spiritual sense except from a knowledge of correspondences, for all the above words are correspondences,and not one word there is without meaning.

The knowledge of correspondences teaches what is signified by the white horse, what by Him who sat on it , what by His eyes that were as a flame of fire, what by the crowns that were upon His head, what by His vesture dipped in blood, what by the white linen in which they were clothed who were of His army in heaven, what by the angel standing in the sun, what by the great supper to which they should come and gather themselves, and what by the flesh of kings, and captains, and others, which they should eat.

The signification of each of these things in the spiritual sense may be seen in White Horse, where they are explained, so that it is unnecessary to explain them further here.

In that little work it has been shown that the Lord in respect to the Word is here described; and that by His eyes which were as a flame of fire, and by the crowns that were upon His head, and by the name that no one knew but He Himself, is meant the spiritual sense of the Word, and that no one can know it but the Lord Himself and he to whom He wills to reveal it; and also that by His vesture dipped in blood is meant the natural sense of the Word, which is the sense of its letter, to which violence has been done. That it is the Word which is thus described is very evident, for it is said "His name is called the Word of God".

What it is the Lord who is meant is equally clear, for it is said that the name of Him who sat on the white horse was written, King of kings and Lord of lords.

That at the end of the church the spiritual sense of the Word is to be opened is signified not only by what is said of the white horse and of Him who rode on it, but also by the great supper to which the angel standing in the sun invited all to come, and to eat the flesh of kings and of captains, of mighty men, of horses, and of them that sat on them, and of all both free and bond.

All these expressions would be empty words and devoid of spirit and life, unless there were what is spiritual within them, like soul in body.

Harry

 

[SpiritualSon]

Rev.12
Verse 7. "And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels fought with the dragon, and the dragon fought and his angels," signifies the falsities of the former church fighting against the truths of the New Church.

There's two ways of explaining this.

1.This war is temptations that are going on inside the person(internally), between the truth of the New Church and the falsities of the former church the person once believe in.

2,Or an outside war between the doctrine of the Christian Churches,which the doctrine of three Divine persons and the doctrine of the New Church,which the doctrine of one God under the Human Form.

The woman in Rev.12:1 represents the New Church,and the child she was about to give birth too,represents its doctrine.

Harry

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Harry-- You're using a circular argument of assumptions based on assumptions confirmed by assumptions.

Your first assumption is that the Bible was divinely inspired, and all your arguments are built off of that. But when we ask you to back up that assumption, you use quotes from the Bible....but the only way those quotes can back up your assumption is if we have ALREADY assumed those quotes were divinely inspired.

 

[Thrasymachus]

This forum is a complete joke. Theists are to be pittied rather than ridiculed. Their ignorance and primacy are their own destruction. . . .

If you cannot distinguish what is true from what is false, then your better judgement is beyond repair.

 

[Lightkeeper]

This forum is a complete joke. Theists are to be pittied rather than ridiculed. Their ignorance and primacy are their own destruction. . . .

If you cannot distinguish what is true from what is false, then your better judgement is beyond repair.

Belittling your opponent in a debate is not debating.

 

[Runt]

*~*MOD POST*~*

Thrasymachus, please review the forum rules. You have broken two. Your comments must be on topic, meaning they should respond to the initial question or topic posted in the debate. Second, you are not to belittle other people. If you wish to demonstrate the fallacy of other people's arguments, do so in a scholarly, polite manner, while responding to the initial topic.

Any further off-topic or rude comments from you will simply be deleted. Thank you.

 

[SpiritualSon]

Yes Harry, you are right, I do not believe in god-- although there was a time when I was very religious. For the sake of this debate, pretend like you're trying to convert me back (if that's not what you genuinely want to do, which would be fine also, hehe)

And on that note, my question: How do you know that god is 'love' and 'wisdom'? More importantly, how do you know he is divine?

Jehovah God is Divine because all good and truth is from Him. There was no trinity at time of creation.Their teach in the Catholic Church that was a trinity of persons before creation,but that is false. Jehovah God Himself took on Human Form under the name Jesus Christ.

There are places in the Old Testament where those who don't believe in God complain about.That because they don't understand what is written in the Word.
As in Jeremiah:
Truth is perished and is cut off from their mouth. Cut off the hair of thy Naziriteship,and cast it away (Jer. 7:28-29).

In Isaiah:
In that day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired in the passages of the river, through the king of Assyria, the head, and the hair of the feet; and shall also consume the beard (Isa. 7:20).

In Micah:
Make thee bald,and shave thee on account of the sons of thy deliciousnesses, enlarge thy baldness as the eagle, because they have migrated from thee (Micah 1:16).

Nor can he know what holiness is involved in that which is related of Elijah, in that he was a hairy man, and girt with a girdle of skin about his loins (2 Kings 1:8) nor why the children who called Elisha bald were torn by she-bears out of the wood (2 Kings 2:23, 24).

Put on baldness, and shave thee on account of the sons of thy delights, and enlarge thy baldness, for they are gone into exile from thee (Micah 1:16).

By Elijah and by Elisha was represented the Lord as to the Word, thus by them was represented the Word, specifically the prophetic Word, as may be seen in what is prefaced to the eighteenth chapter of Genesis.

The "hairiness" and the "girdle of skin" signified the literal sense, a "hairy man" this sense in respect to truths, and a "girdle of skin" about the loins this sense in respect to goods.

For the literal sense of the Word is its natural sense, because it is from the things in the world; and the internal sense is the spiritual sense, because it is from the things in heaven.

These two senses are circumstanced as are the internal and external of man; and because there is no internal without an external, for the external is the ultimate of order in which the internal subsists, therefore it was a reproach against the Word to call Elisha bald, implying that it is devoid of an external, thus that the Word has no sense that is adapted to the apprehension of man.

From all this it is evident that all the details of the Word are holy; but the holiness therein is not apparent to the understanding, except that of one who knows its internal sense; nevertheless by influx from heaven it comes to the perception of him who believes the Word to be holy.

This influx is effected through the internal sense in which the angels are; and although this sense is not understood by the man, still it affects him, because the affection of the angels who are in it is communicated.

From this it is plain also that the Word has been given to man in order that he may have communication with heaven, and that the Divine Truth which is in heaven may affect him by means of the influx.

The children were kill by two she bears because their were marking the Word. By Elijah and by Elisha was represented the Lord as to the Word. Those who don't believe in God complain why this happen.

They say how can a God who all love allow two bears to come out of the woods and kill forty two children?

Why complain about something that you don't believe in? When you complain about God, than you must believe in Him.

Harry

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Thrasymachus--check out (I think it's under General Religious Discussion) the thread "A Kinder, Gentler Atheist". I think we atheists should consider the issues raised in that thread.

I think that we atheists can argue about "the Truth About God" without being cynical/trashing other peoples' beliefs etc. I think it's the stereotypical mean-spirited atheist attitude that prevents theists from WANTING to even look at athiest arguments in the first place--because they don't want to be like us, and for good reason sometimes! :lol:

 

[SpiritualSon]

Since you have not build up any false ideas about God as the Christians did, therefore I will make the truth known to you.

The Christian church believes that God is in three Divine persons. God is not in three Divine persons.

The Holy Spirit being the third person is false.The Lord Himself is the Holy Spirit, because He teaches and leads us. He is the Word. What is meant by the Father,Son and Holy Spirit in the Lord is that there are three attributes which proceed from one God, Creation, Redemption and Regeneration, and that these are the attributes of one God. Jehovah God who is one in Person and in Essence,is the Creator,Redeemer and Regenerator.

In full agreement with this, in the New Testament we find the Lord Jesus Christ saying to the multitude "I and the Father are ONE" -- not two, but one; and He did not say anything about one in purpose, or anything like that. He said simply ONE. In any case, his audience made no mistake about his meaning (the only possible meaning); they took up stones to stone Him, and when asked why they do so, their reply was: "Because that Thou being a Man, maketh Thyself God." It is interesting that the Jewish Church which rejected Him could see what He was saying - but the Christian Church which accepted Him, has not fully known Him.

The Son of God is Jehovah's Human Form that He put on. That's why the Son of God said,"My Father and I are one." The Father was the soul of Jesus Christ.

Harry

 

[SpiritualSon]

It is impossible for the Divine Esse and Existere in itself to produce another Divine which is Esse and Existere in itself.

Therefore another God of the same Essence is impossible. The other Divine Esse and Existere in itself is the son of God that was invented by the church at the Council of Nicene in the year 325AD. Three divine persons from eternity was invented that day. There must had been bunch of parrots trying to find out what the Word was saying. When reason is asleep it can still force the mouth to speak like a parrot. When reason is put to sleep, can the speech which comes from the mouth be anything but lifeless? If the mouth says one thing and the reason goes a different way and disagrees, speech must inevitably be foolish. Like the Christians saying one God with the mouth,but their minds thinks of three. The mouth saids one thing and the mind saids another.

It has been shown already that the one God who is the Creator of the universe, is Esse and Existere in itself, that is, God in Himself; and from this it follows that God from God is impossible, because in such a being the verily essential Divine, which is Esse and Existere in itself, is impossible. It is the same whether you say "begotten of God" or "proceeding from God;" it means, in either case, produced by God, and this differs but little from being created.

Therefore, to introduce into the church a belief in three Divine persons each of whom singly is God, and of the same essence, one of them born from eternity, and a third proceeding from eternity, is to destroy the idea of God's unity, and with it every idea of Divinity, and so cause all the spirituality of reason to be driven into exile.

Then man is man no longer, but is so wholly natural as to differ from a beast only in the power of speech, and is opposed to all the spiritual things of the church, for these the natural man calls foolishness. This is the source and only source from which have sprung the monstrous heresies concerning God; and thus the division of the Divine trinity into persons has introduced into the church not night alone but death as well.

Harry

 

[(Q)]

Mr Spinkles

Harry isn't here to debate or discuss anything - he is here to preach.

 

[MarkT]

This forum is a complete joke. Theists are to be pittied rather than ridiculed. Their ignorance and primacy are their own destruction. . . .

If you cannot distinguish what is true from what is false, then your better judgement is beyond repair.

It all depends on what you believe. We're hardly ignorant of your beliefs.

When people have no a priori knowledge of things, they imagine them. They create models and say they believe in them.

The model is true for you because you believe it is true.

God is true for Christians because we believe in him.

Since God is known to us a priori, his words are known to us. We can accept them. Christ is our light. Our understanding comes from God so that those who understand are of God and those who do not are not of God. It's not a question of everyone understanding. It's a question of finding those individuals who do understand. That's what Christianity is about.[/size]

 

[MarkT]

Truth isn't known in science.

You can't prove something is true. You can only prove it is false.

So there's no way for you to know God. God can't be proven false.

 

[MarkT]

Actually Jesus was the Word of God.

In the beginning God said, "Let there be light" and there was light. This was before the stars and the sun were created. The Word was "let there be light" Indeed the Word was the light that overcame the darkness.

The Word was with God in the beginning.

The Word was in a form of God, the vehicle by whom and through whom God created all things. The Word was the "way" God created all things.

I am the way, the truth and the light.

Then he emptied himself and became one of us, a servant. Jesus was the image of the invisible God, the reflection of his glory. The Son of God.

It's as if God said, "let there be God" and God was, only in the beginning he was light. The Word was, "let there be light" and the Word was God.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Mark T,

Truth isn't known in science.

You can't prove something is true. You can only prove it is false.

This is a good point. Technically nothing is ever 100% fact. We have our scientific laws, such as gravity, but even those are up for contestation any day of the week, that's what science is, after all-- proving and disproving theories. Ya gotta admit though-- the theory of gravity is pretty solid. Likewise, all other 'scientific facts' didn't obtain such status because we thought their names were pretty or something ridiculous like that.

So there's no way for you to know God. God can't be proven false.

:lol: Oh wow, cracking me up!
In science, the lack of evidence for something warrants a lack of existence. I can't go around believeing in unicorns just because there is no evidence against them! I think we would both agree that that would be ridiculous. Question everything and get the facts-- that is my advice to you. Whatever survives the doubt is what you should put faith in-- not soemthing with no foundation.

The model is true for you because you believe it is true.

God is true for Christians because we believe in him.

Correction:
I believe in science because it provides countless amounts of evidence which is logical and can be understood and witnessed by myself (and anyone, for that matter) on a daily basis. Christians believe in god because... well thats just what they believe, ok?

 

[Thrasymachus]

The truth about God:

God is nothingness.

 

[Lightkeeper]

The truth about God:

God is nothingness.

I agree with that. Whatever you think is God, isn't God.