I'm Touring The United States! Starting in June, I'm conducting private events in 23 American cities. Click here for full details.

Post Reply 
The God pill
Author Message
budoslavic Offline
International Playboy
******
Gold Member

Posts: 4,778
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation: 26
Post: #926
RE: The God pill
(06-22-2019 01:11 PM)Roosh Wrote:  I took this picture in Boston. The church is so subverted that it's welcoming people who don't believe in God. It even has a "Rabbi in residence."
...

From their Staff Bio page:
Quote:Rector
[Image: emmanuel-church.jpg]

The Rev. Pamela L. Werntz is Emmanuel’s twelfth and first woman rector, and the first openly-queer rector of an Episcopal parish in Boston. Throughout her career, Pam has worked diligently for social justice and support of the arts, particularly among and on behalf of people who are most marginalized in our society. See “The steadiness of showing up,” which celebrates twenty years of her ministry to incarcerated women.

Pam received her A.B. in English from Franklin and Marshall College. She spent the following 15 years in the private sector, rising to Vice President of Human Resources in a large consulting firm in northern Virginia. In 1996, she migrated north with her family to attend Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, MA. She received her MDiv in 2000, and was awarded Lockhart Scholar for contributions to community life and the Dietrich Prize for best paper on the urban mission of the church.

Pam was ordained as deacon on June 15, 2002 and priest on May 31, 2003 in the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts. She served as Associate Rector at St. Paul’s Church in Brookline, MA, July 2002-January 2008. Emmanuel Church called Pam to serve as Priest-in-Charge in February, 2008, and as Rector in January 2010.

Pam and her wife Joy Howard have three daughters.

[Image: 415-4150299_174-kb-png-honk-honk-pepe-gif-clipart.png]

Thankfully, Eastern/Russian Orthodox Church does not ordain women as priests. And I strongly do not believe nor support women into priesthood. From "Women and the Priesthood":
Quote:The question of women in the priesthood depends upon defining a priest. A priest is not the same as a Protestant minister. A woman may be a minister. A priest offers sacrifice. A Christian priest offers the sacrifice of Christ. Christ is the one who both offers (as High Priest) and is offered (as sacrificial victim). This is an unchangeable dogma of the Church, found in the Divine Liturgy. Therefore, the one who offers (the priest) must correspond to the one offered (the victim).

Christ is the Incarnate Logos, the Second Person of the Trinity. Christ was incarnate as a man. Why? The Holy Trinity is inherently neither male nor female. The Trinity is spirit. However, God the Father has revealed Himself as male. Why? The Father creates all things visible and invisible. The male is the source of creation. The female must be impregnated by the male. As the male is the natural source of creation, the supernatural source is revealed as Father. Christ, the Son, is eternally begotten of the Father. He is the image of the Father. When He is begotten in time, He reveals himself as a male.

Therefore, to correspond to Christ as He reveals himself, the priest must be male. This is the economy of salvation, as revealed in the Bible. This is the economy of salvation, as defined in the dogmas of the Universal Councils. If the priest were female, this would destroy the economy of salvation. Only those who do not accept the Revelation, can argue for ordaining women as priests.

If the priest is the type of Christ, women are the type of the Mother of God. The Mother of God is the most powerful intercessor among mortals. The ministry of women is maternal: intercession, loving service, education, and so forth. Mothers are not inferior to fathers. But mothers are not fathers. Men and women are created absolutely equal but different. To confuse one with the other is to deny the creative intention of God. Therefore, the movement to ordain women to the priesthood is fundamentally anti-Christian.

Edit. I had to look up Episcopal Divinity School because I had a hunch that social justice seems to be a common theme for a church that's being led by a female. From "Episcopal Divinity School to stop granting degrees in June 2017":
Quote:[Episcopal Divinity School press release] Episcopal Divinity School will cease to grant degrees at the end of the upcoming academic year, the seminary’s board of trustees decided July 21 on a 11-4 vote. During the next year, the board will explore options for EDS’s future, some of which were suggested by a specially convened Futures Task Force to make plans for EDS’s future.

“A school that has taken on racism, sexism, heterosexism, and multiple interlocking oppressions is now called to rethink its delivery of theological education in a new and changing world,” said the Very Rev. Gary Hall ’76, chairman of the board, in introducing the resolution. “Ending unsustainable spending is a matter of social justice.”

The options suggested to the task force include merging with another theological seminary, establishing a center for Abrahamic studies, becoming a center for continuing education, fostering lay ministry, and using the seminary’s assets to fund scholarships for seminarians devoted to working on issues of peace and justice.

“It is clear to us that if EDS’s special commitment to working for social justice and the full inclusion of all of God’s people in our common life is to endure, we need to act quickly while the seminary still has sufficient assets to bring to bear in the next phase of its life,” Hall said. “In fact, our commitment to just compensation for all involved was a prime impetus for acting now. Today we have adequate resources for student, faculty, and staff transitions. Given current financial trajectories, five years down the road we would not. We can do it right if we do it now.”
...
(This post was last modified: 06-23-2019 08:39 AM by budoslavic.)
06-23-2019 08:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes budoslavic's post:
infowarrior1
Tail Gunner Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,372
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 41
Post: #927
RE: The God pill
(06-23-2019 08:22 AM)budoslavic Wrote:  From "Women and the Priesthood":

If you read the comments to this article, you will see that some people understand why this is happening:

Quote:I am not sure what how political issue became the central themes of a seminary in the first place. Pushing so much secular politics in Episcopal Churches caused so much division that the denomination is dying.


Quote:While EDS’s strategy was once worthwhile, it is clear now that it was ephemeral, which is to say superficial. Today’s unconventional strategy would be a return to basics in religion and theology—saving souls


Quote:Seminary-based social justice warriors are, if anything, injurious to a project of social improvement which requires vigorous law enforcement and school discipline as its salient feature.


Quote:I agree completely with Tracy Lawrence, Arthur House and others who seem to feel as I do that it is fundamentally the transformation of the Episcopal Church into a left-wing social welfare organization with only minimal interest in saving souls that has caused the difficulties at EDS. Do we all remember Katherine Ragsdale who seven years ago referred to abortion as a “blessing” and whose appointment to the Presidency of EDS “thrilled” the then-Episcopal bishop of Massachusetts? Just as many lifelong Episcopalians have left and continue to leave the church in disgust, so has the pool of potential EDS students presumably shrunk in recent years when they see the school specializing in courses like “Feminist Theories and Theologizing.” EDS has brought upon itself its own financial problems as have so many other Episcopal institutions but none of those responsible seem to care.
(This post was last modified: 06-23-2019 10:02 AM by Tail Gunner.)
06-23-2019 10:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Tail Gunner's post:
budoslavic
budoslavic Offline
International Playboy
******
Gold Member

Posts: 4,778
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation: 26
Post: #928
RE: The God pill
(06-23-2019 10:01 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  
(06-23-2019 08:22 AM)budoslavic Wrote:  ...

If you read the comments to this article, you will see that some people understand why this is happening:
...

Yep, I saw those comments on the article page. This comment is interesting too:
Quote:I find it stunning that a theological school with an endowment of $53 million dollars and a valuable campus neighboring Harvard University can’t figure out how to run a degree-granting program that attracts more than 35 students. The Episcopal Church and other religious bodies have a desperate need for theologically educated members, including clergy paid and unpaid. What have the board and faculty been doing instead of discerning and meeting the needs of the 21st century church?
06-23-2019 10:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Emperor Constantine Offline
Game Denialist

Posts: 40
Joined: May 2019
Reputation: 0
Post: #929
RE: The God pill
(06-23-2019 06:31 AM)Sword and Board Wrote:  The whole Judeo-Christian thing I hear modern Christians tote about is baffling. It takes about ten minutes of research to realize Judaism is fundamentally against the belief in Christ. In fact the Talmud scriptures have Jesus eternally tortured in their version of hell.

Yeah, when someone says Judeo-Christian values, typically they mean Christian values and they're clueless about Judaism. It's especially amusing when you hear a preacher say something about the wrongness of divorce or fornication being our "Judeo-Christian" family values.

I've heard the term was first used by Jews, in order to emphasize their common heritage with Christians and thereby dissipate the antisemitism that was once common amongst Christians.
06-23-2019 10:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Emperor Constantine's post:
MusicForThePiano, VNvet
Tail Gunner Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,372
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 41
Post: #930
RE: The God pill
(06-23-2019 10:24 AM)Emperor Constantine Wrote:  Yeah, when someone says Judeo-Christian values, typically they mean Christian values and they're clueless about Judaism.

That has not been my understanding at all. Unless something has changed, among conservative Christians the phrase Judeo-Christian values refers directly to the principles of due process, including the need for witnesses and a jury, found in the Old Testament -- and upon which the United States was founded.

Early Jewish law, in the time of the Judges (before the era of the Jewish Kings) implemented a system of due process that resulted in a very fair system of justice in ancient times. Many of these principles are enshrined in the U.S. Constitution through the Bill of Rights. That is exactly what I think of when I hear "Judeo-Christian values."


Edit -- After doing some further research: "Promoting the concept of the United States as a Judeo-Christian nation first became a political program in the 1940s, in response to the growth of anti-Semitism in America. The rise of Nazi anti-semitism in the 1930s led concerned Protestants, Catholics, and Jews to take steps to increase understanding and tolerance."

"By the 1980s and 1990s favorable references to "Judeo-Christian values" were common, and the term was used by conservative Christians. "President Ronald Reagan frequently emphasized Judeo-Christian values as necessary ingredients in the fight against Communism. He argued that the Bible contains "all the answers to the problems that face us." Reagan disapproved of the growth of secularism and emphasized the need to take the idea of sin seriously."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judeo-Christian_ethics
(This post was last modified: 06-23-2019 11:00 AM by Tail Gunner.)
06-23-2019 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Tail Gunner's post:
RoastBeefCurtains4Me, infowarrior1
Vladimir Poontang Offline
Alpha Male
****

Posts: 1,384
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 26
Post: #931
RE: The God pill
What do those who know more about this stuff think about the gospel of grace?

That's not how we do things in Russia, comrade.

http://inspiredentrepreneur.weebly.com/
06-24-2019 05:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Tail Gunner Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,372
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 41
Post: #932
RE: The God pill
(06-24-2019 05:53 PM)Vladimir Poontang Wrote:  What do those who know more about this stuff think about the gospel of grace?

Do you have a specific question? You are like one of those guys that says "What country should I visit"? Uh, how about narrowing it down to a few countries and then asking specific questions about each one.

The gospel of grace can be simplified by this statement: "Jesus plus nothing".

Quote:I consider my life worth nothing to me, if only I may finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me—the task of testifying to the gospel of God’s grace.

Acts 20:24.

The gospel of grace is the gospel -- and there is no other. This gospel is built, not on a doctrine or a theology, but on Jesus Christ himself:

Quote:The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth … From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

John 1:14, 16-17

Jesus is grace personified.
(This post was last modified: 06-24-2019 06:15 PM by Tail Gunner.)
06-24-2019 06:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Tail Gunner's post:
infowarrior1
Vladimir Poontang Offline
Alpha Male
****

Posts: 1,384
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 26
Post: #933
RE: The God pill
(06-24-2019 06:12 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  
(06-24-2019 05:53 PM)Vladimir Poontang Wrote:  What do those who know more about this stuff think about the gospel of grace?

Do you have a specific question? You are like one of those guys that says "What country should I visit"? Uh, how about narrowing it down to a few countries and then asking specific questions about each one.

The gospel of grace can be simplified by this statement: "Jesus plus nothing".

Quote:I consider my life worth nothing to me, if only I may finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me—the task of testifying to the gospel of God’s grace.

Acts 20:24.

The gospel of grace is the gospel -- and there is no other. This gospel is built, not on a doctrine or a theology, but on Jesus Christ himself:

Quote:The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth … From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

John 1:14, 16-17

Jesus is grace personified.

My question was a general one because I like to know what people think first before getting specific. I didn't have a specific question in mind. But I do have one now, which is :

If you don't have to worry about sinning, but at the same time you shouldn't mock God by saying "oh well, who cares, I'll just do as I please", then what are you supposed to do exactly (apart from believe, of course)? Are you supposed to just be yourself and do what you want within reason, and try not to sin but not feel too bad if you do? I also wonder what criticisms there are of the grace gospel.

By the way bible quotes usually don't mean much to me as I'm not learned enough to get a lot of them (which is also why I don't use them myself), but I appreciate the references, and I'm glad there's plenty of them.

That's not how we do things in Russia, comrade.

http://inspiredentrepreneur.weebly.com/
(This post was last modified: 06-24-2019 06:20 PM by Vladimir Poontang.)
06-24-2019 06:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
ThriceLazarus Offline
Beta Orbiter
*

Posts: 137
Joined: Dec 2018
Reputation: 2
Post: #934
RE: The God pill
LOVE the LORD

Don’t be an asshole

That’s the whole of the Law.
06-24-2019 06:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like ThriceLazarus's post:
Vladimir Poontang, infowarrior1
Tail Gunner Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,372
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 41
Post: #935
RE: The God pill
(06-24-2019 06:17 PM)Vladimir Poontang Wrote:  If you don't have to worry about sinning

Why would you possibly believe that? You can backslide yourself straight into hell. See this post about backsliding:

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-72750...pid1991173

The duty of a Christian is to scratch and claw your way towards perfection through the process of sanctification (i.e., to become more Christ-like).

In your previous post you asked about "the gospel of grace." That involves the first of three stages in the life of a Christian: Justification.

Now, you ask about comporting oneself as a Christian, having been justified through the gospel of grace. That is the second stage: Sanctification. This is a never-ending process that requires many continued acts of faith throughout your life and, hopefully, results in continuous spiritual growth.

   

See the additional chart here, with bible references:

http://www.grace-bible.org/resources/art...-salvation
(This post was last modified: 06-24-2019 07:03 PM by Tail Gunner.)
06-24-2019 06:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Tail Gunner's post:
Vladimir Poontang, infowarrior1
Vladimir Poontang Offline
Alpha Male
****

Posts: 1,384
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 26
Post: #936
RE: The God pill
I didn't mean to not care. I'm just saying that if believing in Jesus means that you're good with God, but if at the same time that's not a license to sin, then what do you do? Are you supposed to still try your best not to sin but without tormenting yourself with guilt every time you fall short, or...does something happen to you to make you gradually more disgusted with the idea of sinning and therefore you'll (super)naturally do it less and less? I'm asking if believing in Jesus will cause Jesus to get inside you and start turning you into a non sinner, thus removing the need to worry about sinning.

That's not how we do things in Russia, comrade.

http://inspiredentrepreneur.weebly.com/
(This post was last modified: 06-24-2019 07:09 PM by Vladimir Poontang.)
06-24-2019 07:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Tail Gunner Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,372
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 41
Post: #937
RE: The God pill
(06-24-2019 07:08 PM)Vladimir Poontang Wrote:  I didn't mean to not care. I'm just saying that if believing in Jesus means that you're good with God, but if at the same time that's not a license to sin, then what do you do? Are you supposed to still try your best not to sin but without tormenting yourself with guilt every time you fall short, or...does something happen to you to make you gradually more disgusted with the idea of sinning and therefore you'll (super)naturally do it less and less? I'm asking if believing in Jesus will cause Jesus to get inside you and start turning you into a non sinner, thus removing the need to worry about sinning.

Yes, the Holy Ghost will dwell within you -- and will help guide you, while you reinforce His guidance by studying scripture and attending church for fellowship with other believers. All of these things are important as a bulwarks against sin. Moreover, your fear of God (in terms of backsliding), your love of God, and your desire for everlasting reward will all reinforce the desire to minimize your sin. So, you should cultivate all three. Guarding against sin is really a holistic endeavor with many components. After all, you are attempting to overcome the dark aspects of human nature.

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-72750...pid1991363
(This post was last modified: 06-24-2019 07:31 PM by Tail Gunner.)
06-24-2019 07:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 3 users Like Tail Gunner's post:
Vladimir Poontang, infowarrior1, Dismal Operator
infowarrior1 Offline
True Player
*****

Posts: 1,521
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 10
Post: #938
RE: The God pill
A non-fedora Atheist perspective on God:




Raises some good points for thought even for us believers. But seems to come to a similar conclusion to Gnostics.

Actual objections not fedora level gammatude.

Think one of the most powerful objections is that God hasn't made himself apparent enough in such a way that it would be undeniable to the majority of people ensuing much more salvation knowing each of their circumstances and the best way that they can be saved in contrast to the few that are predicted to be saved.

However that seemed to have been anticipated already by Paul:
Acts 17:27
Quote:27God intended that they would seek Him and perhaps reach out for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us

Romans 1:19-20
Quote:19For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse.

Yet Dark Matter claimed as far as we know that he has investigated as deeply as he can. Yet cannot find evidence of God. Perhaps we will only truly know at the great white throne judgment.
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2019 08:42 AM by infowarrior1.)
06-25-2019 08:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
scorpion Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,513
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 257
Post: #939
RE: The God pill
There are no atheists who actually reject the idea of God on a rational, logical basis, because an objectively rational look at the question of whether God exists must invariably answer in the affirmative. The complexity of the physical world and the systems that support life on this planet are staggering. The very existence of so many different life forms is itself completely extraordinary. Think about how difficult it would be for humanity to design an autonomous, self-replicating robot that could survive absent any human input whatsoever. It's something we still can't even get close to doing with all of our science and technology.

And yet that is basically the definition of every life form on this planet - millions of them. Millions of different self-replicating organic machines with wildly different designs. The idea that such unimaginable complexity appeared out of inorganic compounds and then evolved randomly is quite literally insane. It's something that almost no one historically believed, because it was so manifestly ridiculous to anyone who actually lives in nature and observes its complexity on a daily basis. And this was before people even had an inkling about cellular structures and DNA, which just ramps the complexity and the obviousness of design up an entire order of magnitude.

Atheism is simply an attitude of rebellion trying to pass itself off as an intellectual argument. They don't reject the evidence for God, they reject the idea of God, because they can't stand the corresponding implication that they would then be accountable to God. It's an ego thing.

"For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.” - Romans 8:18
06-25-2019 09:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 5 users Like scorpion's post:
ilostabet, HermeticAlly, RDF, Sooth, infowarrior1
Phobos Offline
Male Feminist

Posts: 2
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 0
Post: #940
RE: The God pill
I too have had trouble understanding what the bible says with regards to the gospel, grace and salvation. In fact misunderstandings have caused me great distress.

The one key thing to remember is to divide the word of God correctly: “Endeavour to present yourself to God qualified, an unashamed worker, correctly cutting the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)

Dividing the scriptures correctly will remove all confusion. A lot of the New Testament (including Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) only relates to Israel and was not meant for gentiles (although we can learn a lot from these scriptures). There was one gospel (evangel) for Israel and another for the gentiles revealed to Paul by progressive revealation. This means that for Christians now the most relevant scripture are Pauls later letters.

"I have been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision, according as Peter of the Circumcision." (Galatians 2:7)

http://thewordontheword.blogspot.com/201...roven.html

http://thewordontheword.blogspot.com/201...-paul.html

For Christians today getting right with God/ Salvation is totally 100% dependant on having faith in Jesus Christ, that he died for our sin, was entombed and was raised on the third day. Luckily for us our Christian performance can't disqualify us from salvation but bad behaviour will displease God and he may/will withhold rewards from us in the next life.

http://www.graceevangel.org/zz%20Files03...29-05).pdf

http://martinzender.com/Return_to_Zender...rences.pdf


The following resources have helped me a lot on my path.

https://www.concordant.org/ - On this site there are many free PDFs including the Old and New Testaments. I believe this to be the most accurate translation available of the bible.

http://www.graceevangel.org/home.html

http://www.martinzender.com/ - I don't agree with everything he says but he is entertaining.

https://www.biggestjesus.com/ - A new site I have just found so have not read it yet but it looks interesting. You can read his book free
https://www.biggestjesus.com/p/jesus-and...-pdf.html. Note that the author has since changed his mind about the nature of judgement of unbelievers.

The following link greatly expounds on what I have already mentioned and also talks about the Church:

http://www.graceevangel.org/zz%20Files01...o%20To.pdf


The above resources may diverge greatly from some mainstream Christian teachings but I encourage everyone to examine these ideas. These were the answers I was led to when I was in a dark place in my life after much prayer. I hope these answers will help others.
06-25-2019 10:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Vladimir Poontang Offline
Alpha Male
****

Posts: 1,384
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 26
Post: #941
RE: The God pill
(06-25-2019 09:47 AM)scorpion Wrote:  There are no atheists who actually reject the idea of God on a rational, logical basis, because an objectively rational look at the question of whether God exists must invariably answer in the affirmative. The complexity of the physical world and the systems that support life on this planet are staggering. The very existence of so many different life forms is itself completely extraordinary. Think about how difficult it would be for humanity to design an autonomous, self-replicating robot that could survive absent any human input whatsoever. It's something we still can't even get close to doing with all of our science and technology.

And yet that is basically the definition of every life form on this planet - millions of them. Millions of different self-replicating organic machines with wildly different designs. The idea that such unimaginable complexity appeared out of inorganic compounds and then evolved randomly is quite literally insane. It's something that almost no one historically believed, because it was so manifestly ridiculous to anyone who actually lives in nature and observes its complexity on a daily basis. And this was before people even had an inkling about cellular structures and DNA, which just ramps the complexity and the obviousness of design up an entire order of magnitude.

Atheism is simply an attitude of rebellion trying to pass itself off as an intellectual argument. They don't reject the evidence for God, they reject the idea of God, because they can't stand the corresponding implication that they would then be accountable to God. It's an ego thing.

I used to troll atheist forums like crazy. They think they're so rational and superior to believers. They think that they only base their beliefs on pure evidence, as if they're computers. They don't realize that the reason they don't believe in God is because they don't want to, it's because they're just not feeling it, the same way that I feel there's a God. But they don't want to admit it.

They think that if you don't believe based on evidence or a logical argument, then it must be delusion. Delusion is when you ignore evidence that contradicts what you want to believe, or make up evidence that supports it. But there's a third way, which is to simply make a choice to believe. In fact that's a very honest basis, because you're acknowledging your wishful thinking (which everyone has, including atheists), while not deluding yourself at all.

I wonder what would happen if someone went on one of those atheist forums and gave them this challenge : If you believe as best as you can, despite all resistance, you will end up genuinely believing, and when you do, you'll understand that God met you half way and actually made you know. They'd never go for it.

That's not how we do things in Russia, comrade.

http://inspiredentrepreneur.weebly.com/
06-25-2019 11:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Vladimir Poontang's post:
infowarrior1
Tail Gunner Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,372
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 41
Post: #942
RE: The God pill
(06-25-2019 10:44 AM)Phobos Wrote:  A lot of the New Testament (including Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) only relates to Israel and was not meant for gentiles (although we can learn a lot from these scriptures). There was one gospel (evangel) for Israel and another for the gentiles revealed to Paul by progressive revealation. This means that for Christians now the most relevant scripture are Pauls later letters.

This is absolutely wrong. You are correct that knowing the audience is critical to correctly interpreting scripture. In fact, it is so important that I have the audience for each Gospel written into my bible, which is why I know that your statement is wrong.

Matthew -- audience was the Jews and it assumes a familiarity with the Jewish religion.

Mark -- audience was the gentile church in Rome.

Luke -- Luke was a doctor and a Turk who wrote to an individual gentile, likely a Greek.

John -- audience was mature believers, both gentile and Jew.

I double-checked this just to make sure that I was correct. Here is the first random article that I found, which backs up what I have written in my bible.

https://www.christianity.com/jesus/is-je...ences.html


It is axiomatic that all the Gospels are absolutely essential to understanding the nature of Jesus, the Father, and the plan of salvation.
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2019 02:22 PM by Tail Gunner.)
06-25-2019 02:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
DiRocchio Offline
Male Feminist

Posts: 6
Joined: May 2019
Reputation: 2
Post: #943
RE: The God pill
(06-25-2019 10:44 AM)Phobos Wrote:  Dividing the scriptures correctly will remove all confusion. A lot of the New Testament (including Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) only relates to Israel and was not meant for gentiles (although we can learn a lot from these scriptures). There was one gospel (evangel) for Israel and another for the gentiles revealed to Paul by progressive revealation. This means that for Christians now the most relevant scripture are Pauls later letters.

This appears to highlight the conflict between the dispensationalist intepretation of scripture and the catholic/orthodox/anglicanism interpretation, the latter group believing that the 'Church' is the new Israel and has replaced the Jews as the chosen people of God. I'm not as steeped in the subject as you appear to be and many other members on here so I am happy to be corrected.
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2019 03:03 PM by DiRocchio.)
06-25-2019 02:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Tail Gunner Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,372
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 41
Post: #944
RE: The God pill
(06-25-2019 02:48 PM)DiRocchio Wrote:  
(06-25-2019 10:44 AM)Phobos Wrote:  Dividing the scriptures correctly will remove all confusion. A lot of the New Testament (including Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) only relates to Israel and was not meant for gentiles (although we can learn a lot from these scriptures). There was one gospel (evangel) for Israel and another for the gentiles revealed to Paul by progressive revealation. This means that for Christians now the most relevant scripture are Pauls later letters.

This appears to highlight the conflict between the dispensationalist intepretation of scripture and the catholic/orthodox/anglicanism interpretation, the latter group believing that the 'Church' is the new Israel and has replaced the Jews as the chosen people of God. I'm not as steeped in the subject as you appear to be and many other members on here so I am happy to be corrected.

I believe that you are discussing a separate issue. What Phobos wrote was that "A lot of the New Testament (including Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) . . . was not meant for gentiles." As a matter of historical fact, that claim is false. We know with certainty that three of those four gospels were written to gentile audiences. There is no debate over that fact (as far as I know). For example, we know that Dr. Luke wrote the Gospel of Luke to a gentile named Theophilus -- because the letter specifically says so:

Quote:1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

Luke 1:1-4
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2019 04:04 PM by Tail Gunner.)
06-25-2019 04:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Wutang Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,503
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 43
Post: #945
RE: The God pill
(06-21-2019 08:42 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  
(06-21-2019 08:25 PM)Oak Wrote:  Can someone help explain the commandment:

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Does this extend to humans?

In this documentary on the Amish (1.50) it says that this is why the Amish refuse to be photographed.

The reproduction of images of humans creates so much evil (social media, instagram, selfies, hollywood etc.), that surely God would disapprove.

Start with the language of the second commandment. What does it say?

Quote:“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image or any likeness of any thing that is in Heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me, and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me and keep My Commandments”

Exodus 20:4-6.

God Himself shortly afterwards ordered Israel to "make two cherubim of gold of beaten work" for the mercy-seat (Exo. 25:18) and later the serpent of brass. So, it is manifest error to view the commandment as condemning all statuary, paintings, and images. It is not the ingenuity of making such things, but the stupidity in worshipping them, which is condemned. That is clear from the language "thou shalt not bow down thyself to them."

Because God is a spiritual and omnipotent Being, to represent Him as of a material and limited form is a falsehood and an insult to His majesty.

I've thought for a long time about why it's forbidden for God to be explicitly depicted in visual art. It seemed to me similar to a lot of the Old Testament commands - obscure and I'm not sure about what it was commanded. After years of reading atheist discourse on the internet, I came up with an answer.

What's one of the most common attacks you see against God by fedora atheists? You'll see them referring to Him as "an old guy with a beard", "invisible bearded guy" and variations of that. Related to this is comparisons of God to the pagan gods you see find in all different areas of the world: "Oh how is God different from Thor/Odin/Shiva/etc?"

I believe that when God is depicted in visual form it does "represent Him as of a material and limited form" and that's what has lead to all the hackneyed comments about him being an old guy with a beard in the sky. I remember having an forum religious debate with some fedora guy about 10 years ago when New Atheism was at it's height and when I suggested it was silly to believe that God was an guy with a beard he responded by posting an image of the famous Sistine Chapel painting of God touching Adam with his finger.
06-25-2019 05:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Wutang's post:
infowarrior1
JackinMelbourne Away
Wingman
***
Gold Member

Posts: 754
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 7
Post: #946
RE: The God pill
(06-25-2019 05:13 PM)Wutang Wrote:  
(06-21-2019 08:42 PM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  
(06-21-2019 08:25 PM)Oak Wrote:  Can someone help explain the commandment:

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Does this extend to humans?

In this documentary on the Amish (1.50) it says that this is why the Amish refuse to be photographed.

The reproduction of images of humans creates so much evil (social media, instagram, selfies, hollywood etc.), that surely God would disapprove.

Start with the language of the second commandment. What does it say?

Quote:“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image or any likeness of any thing that is in Heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me, and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me and keep My Commandments”

Exodus 20:4-6.

God Himself shortly afterwards ordered Israel to "make two cherubim of gold of beaten work" for the mercy-seat (Exo. 25:18) and later the serpent of brass. So, it is manifest error to view the commandment as condemning all statuary, paintings, and images. It is not the ingenuity of making such things, but the stupidity in worshipping them, which is condemned. That is clear from the language "thou shalt not bow down thyself to them."

Because God is a spiritual and omnipotent Being, to represent Him as of a material and limited form is a falsehood and an insult to His majesty.

I've thought for a long time about why it's forbidden for God to be explicitly depicted in visual art. It seemed to me similar to a lot of the Old Testament commands - obscure and I'm not sure about what it was commanded. After years of reading atheist discourse on the internet, I came up with an answer.

What's one of the most common attacks you see against God by fedora atheists? You'll see them referring to Him as "an old guy with a beard", "invisible bearded guy" and variations of that. Related to this is comparisons of God to the pagan gods you see find in all different areas of the world: "Oh how is God different from Thor/Odin/Shiva/etc?"

I believe that when God is depicted in visual form it does "represent Him as of a material and limited form" and that's what has lead to all the hackneyed comments about him being an old guy with a beard in the sky. I remember having an forum religious debate with some fedora guy about 10 years ago when New Atheism was at it's height and when I suggested it was silly to believe that God was an guy with a beard he responded by posting an image of the famous Sistine Chapel painting of God touching Adam with his finger.

Maybe god is alien to us (true if real) and it would shock people to know it's form(s). This would lead to rejection.

But if god made man in his own image, people could also reject him for being just a man. The first man?

Or, you as a man are god, as is every other man that creates more hu-men in their image (children).

Men did write the bibles... so what came first, the men or the god(s). It's an infinite loop. Knowing this is the reason why it's always the newest religion that believes it's the most legitimate. Because it builds on the ones that came before... the combined work of men with many faces who came before them.

God really is in all of us. It's our ancestor's (creators) combined genetics and knowledge of the world (spirit).

Smoke on that one...

For entertainment and educational use only, your m8 Jackin'
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2019 05:45 PM by JackinMelbourne.)
06-25-2019 05:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Vladimir Poontang Offline
Alpha Male
****

Posts: 1,384
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 26
Post: #947
RE: The God pill
(06-25-2019 05:30 PM)JackinMelbourne Wrote:  But if god made man in his own image, people could also reject him for being just a man. The first man?

No I don't think that could happen. I'm pretty sure God is much more impressive of a man than any of us. He's the ultimate Alpha and Omega male, so He's pretty much got the full package. In fact if He had a forum similar to this one none of us would be allowed. God sees our faces every day with no problems, but if we saw His face we would be destroyed. We wouldn't be able to handle it unless He makes us able to.

That's not how we do things in Russia, comrade.

http://inspiredentrepreneur.weebly.com/
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2019 05:40 PM by Vladimir Poontang.)
06-25-2019 05:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
JackinMelbourne Away
Wingman
***
Gold Member

Posts: 754
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 7
Post: #948
RE: The God pill
(06-25-2019 05:39 PM)Vladimir Poontang Wrote:  
(06-25-2019 05:30 PM)JackinMelbourne Wrote:  But if god made man in his own image, people could also reject him for being just a man. The first man?

No I don't think that could happen. I'm pretty sure God is much more impressive of a man than any of us. He's the ultimate Alpha and Omega male, so He's pretty much got the full package. In fact if He had a forum similar to this one none of us would be allowed. God sees our faces every day with no problems, but if we saw His face we would be destroyed. We wouldn't be able to handle it unless He makes us able to.

Read the rest of my post for context, I edited it. Basically there is no singular god that looks impressive/scary/whatever. That's fairy tale stuff and the reason atheists mock some religions.

Edit: I'm going to contradict myself for discussion only: If you follow the Catholic Church then (according to some people and the Vatican) god has been outed as the "Lucifer" (Light Bringer) and is in fact probably scary if the King James Church is to be believed... and it's also quite possibly man made horseshit stemming from TPB or just astronomy from the mystery schools (Venus is Lucifer... there is also Sun Worship, Saturn etc... it's all in there pre-dating modern Churchianity).

I don't know much about the Eastern Orthodox Church so won't comment. That's for you to believe and comment on... and I do thank you for your comments as it gives me an idea of your thought process.

For entertainment and educational use only, your m8 Jackin'
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2019 06:22 PM by JackinMelbourne.)
06-25-2019 05:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Tail Gunner Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,372
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 41
Post: #949
RE: The God pill
(06-25-2019 05:39 PM)Vladimir Poontang Wrote:  
(06-25-2019 05:30 PM)JackinMelbourne Wrote:  But if god made man in his own image, people could also reject him for being just a man. The first man?

No I don't think that could happen. I'm pretty sure God is much more impressive of a man than any of us. He's the ultimate Alpha and Omega male, so He's pretty much got the full package. In fact if He had a forum similar to this one none of us would be allowed. God sees our faces every day with no problems, but if we saw His face we would be destroyed. We wouldn't be able to handle it unless He makes us able to.

Always refer to scripture for answers. We are created in god's image as spiritual beings, not in physical form. God says that no one can look at God and live. Exodus 33:20 Moses came down from the mountain with the Ten Commandments and after seeing a partial view of God’s backside, his face radiated with glory, the Shekinah glory of God. This was recorded in Exodus 34:29-35:

“When Moses came down from Mount Sinai, with the two tablets of the testimony in his hand as he came down from the mountain, Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God. Aaron and all the people of Israel saw Moses, and behold, the skin of his face shone, and they were afraid to come near him. But Moses called to them, and Aaron and all the leaders of the congregation returned to him, and Moses talked with them.

Afterward all the people of Israel came near, and he commanded them all that the Lord had spoken with him in Mount Sinai. And when Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil over his face. Whenever Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he would remove the veil, until he came out. And when he came out and told the people of Israel what he was commanded, the people of Israel would see the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face was shining. And Moses would put the veil over his face again, until he went in to speak with him.”

Like the moon only reflects the light of the sun and has no source of light in itself, so too did the face of Moses reflect the glory of God.

This is the Shekinah glory that is sometimes present in the cloud that descended on the Temple and the Tabernacle. "The LORD was going before them in a pillar of cloud by day to lead them on the way, and in a pillar of fire by night to give them light, that they might travel by day and by night. He did not take away the pillar of cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people." Exodus 13:21-22
_____________

Jesus’ Glory of the Transfiguration:

Jesus partially revealed His Shekinah glory on a mountain and allowed Peter, James, and John to see this glory. This is why the Apostle John said that Jesus “dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father” (John 1:14).

“And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James, and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light. And behold, there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him. And Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, it is good that we are here. If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah.” He was still speaking when, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.” When the disciples heard this, they fell on their faces and were terrified. But Jesus came and touched them, saying, “Rise, and have no fear.” And when they lifted up their eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only.”

Matthew 17:1-8

The Transfiguration is where Jesus briefly peeled back His humanity to allow the disciples to see the very Shekinah glory of God. It was overwhelming to them, just as it is to anyone where God reveals His glory. When Jesus ascended into heaven after His resurrection, He ascended with this Shekinah glory in the clouds.
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2019 06:23 PM by Tail Gunner.)
06-25-2019 06:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Tail Gunner's post:
infowarrior1, alchemical
nomadbrah Offline
International Playboy
******

Posts: 5,371
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 66
Post: #950
RE: The God pill
Tail Gunner,

The "judges" of ancient Israel was the Tribe of Dan, which according to wiki literally means "judge".

The tribe of Dan were also aegean greeks, they were not jews and not semittic.

If you think that this time of judges in Israel was good, then it's no so strange when you learn that the judges were not jews but europeans. They were in fact, historically exiled, by the Assyrians. This is the origin of the belief of British Israelism and why they believe the British are the tribe of Dan.
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2019 06:24 PM by nomadbrah.)
06-25-2019 06:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Blue pill, red pill, purple pill, black pill &... woke pill ? CynicalContrarian 14 2,106 02-14-2019 11:56 AM
Last Post: Atlanta Man
  Red pill, Blue pill, Yellow pill? ("Asian Aryanism") Svara 6 4,588 09-12-2017 04:22 AM
Last Post: RatInTheWoods
  Is religion considered blue-pill or red-pill III 3 3,233 05-14-2015 02:43 PM
Last Post: TheWastelander

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)

Contact Us | RooshV.com | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication