83
   

How can we be sure that all religions are wrong?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Oct, 2017 11:05 am
@peacecrusader888,
Quote:
It may be Satan who is masquerading as that true God.
+
How would humans know the difference?
peacecrusader888
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Oct, 2017 05:18 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
How would humans know the difference?


Both the true God and Satan are omnipotent and omnipresent, but only the true God is omniscient. He knows everything, including what happened in the past and what will happen in the future.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Oct, 2017 05:26 pm
@peacecrusader888,
How will humans know the true god, since the Jewish god was for the Jews only? God of the Jews . . . and Only the Jews
3/07/2013 | Share this article:
9
105 Comments
By WizenedSage (Galen Rose) ~

Christians insist that Bible-god is the one true god who seeks the worship of all humans the world over. Unfortunately for them, those who wrote the Bible, whether ancient humans or god himself, painted a very different picture. In fact, there is a wealth of evidence in the Bible that Bible-god was never intended for anyone other than the Israelites, the ethnic Jews. The Bible clearly states the Jews were god’s chosen people and that Bible-god is a strictly regional, tribal god who really didn’t give a damn about Gentiles (non Jews) of any kind.

In speaking of the Jews in Deuteronomy 7:6, Bible-god says:

“For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.”
cameronleon
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 12 Oct, 2017 12:33 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:

Christians insist that Bible-god is the one true god who seeks the worship of all humans the world over. Unfortunately for them, those who wrote the Bible, whether ancient humans or god himself, painted a very different picture. In fact, there is a wealth of evidence in the Bible that Bible-god was never intended for anyone other than the Israelites, the ethnic Jews. The Bible clearly states the Jews were god’s chosen people and that Bible-god is a strictly regional, tribal god who really didn’t give a damn about Gentiles (non Jews) of any kind.

In speaking of the Jews in Deuteronomy 7:6, Bible-god says:

“For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.”


When you open a bible and find the book about Ruth, you will also find out that she was a Moabite.

Moab was one of the sons of the daughters of Lot who committed incest with their father, apparently because they thought there weren't other people in the world and they should continue with the existence of humans.

Later on, the descendants of Moab turned against Israel.

Ruth, the Moabite, married an Israelite. But the Israelite died, so Ruth was free to go back with her people. The mother in law told her that she can do so.

But Ruth decided different, she told her mother in law that she was going to stay with her because for Ruth the God of Israel was her God and the people of Israel was her people.

The book of Ruth between the other books forming the bible, is essential because shows that a foreign person who doesn't belong to Israel (the chosen people) can be part of it by renouncing his gods and people's customs and adopting the customs of the people of Israel and worshiping the God of Israel.

This part is also explaining by the apostle Saul (Paul) who made an analogy of the wild and good olive trees, where some branches of the good olive tree are taken out and branches of a wild tree are inserted.

In the analogy the good olive tree is Israel, and the wild tree is the people of the nations of the world (gentiles). The apostle made the figure of people of the nations of the world inserted in Israel and be part of the same tree, in other words, the same promises.

But, of course, you left your church many years ago and today, instead of reading the bible and have your own conclusions from the reading, you prefer to read the words of a sure ignorant as it is WizenedSage.

Fortunately for you, you know now that you still have a chance just by leaving the status of "gentile" and being part of the good olive tree.

If you as a gentile are inserted as a branch in the good olive tree by your own will, I promise to buy lots of fertilizer and poured on the root area, because will be badly needed....








cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Oct, 2017 12:43 pm
@cameronleon,
You got your human (homo sapiens sapiens) history all wrong! We evolved from the primates some 200,000 years ago. Humans evolved in Africa, not Israel. http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-sapiens We are not the descendants of Adam and Eve from 7000 years ago.
cameronleon
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 08:50 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
You got your human (homo sapiens sapiens) history all wrong! We evolved from the primates some 200,000 years ago. Humans evolved in Africa, not Israel. http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-sapiens We are not the descendants of Adam and Eve from 7000 years ago.


Yes, I know...

My ancestors were humans, yours were monkeys.

This is why in this discussion I'm the one who answers with reasoning.
fresco
 
  3  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 09:21 am
@cameronleon,
Smile No, you are the one who answers with dogma. Reasoning would involve recognition of that.
cameronleon
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 11:08 am
@fresco,
Quote:
No, you are the one who answers with dogma. Reasoning would involve recognition of that.


Before replying to your words, let me be sure whom are I'm talking with.

Are you, like Ciceron Imposter, another monkey descendant?
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 03:08 pm
@cameronleon,
Of course. But my 'monkey ancestors' may have had a few more brain cells than yours.
Amoh5
 
  0  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 03:14 pm
@cameronleon,
Yup it would seem like Fresco does Cameron, hes always up to his no good monkey business
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 03:40 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
a few more brain cells


That's an under statement of the year! Wink
0 Replies
 
cameronleon
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 04:47 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
Of course. But my 'monkey ancestors' may have had a few more brain cells than yours.


I doubt it because like your ancestors, your replies are just the usual "monkey see monkey do" ... no reasoning.
Amoh5
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Oct, 2017 09:39 pm
@cameronleon,
Hahahahahhahahaahahahahaha!!! Damn your witty alright Cameron!! You're the man!! I don't think these guys who follow the evolution path from monkeys n apes would wanna mess with you, you put them right in their place.
I've never agreed with that idea myself, I think humans have had their own evolutionary path separate from other primates, we are unique in my own opinion.
I am a believer in evolution, that all lifeforms evolve so to speak, but the only question is how and when? especially with all this theoretical science versus testable science.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Oct, 2017 01:01 am
@Amoh5,
There could be hope for you yet ! Wink
Religious cherry picking is the equivalent of bending with the wind.
Amoh5
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Oct, 2017 02:35 am
@fresco,
Come on Fresco, you know as well as I that atheism and religion(theism) are merely ideologies, I know you like to cherry-pick your own ideology which makes you a hypocrite, even preaching your own ideology on your soapbox here on A2k, which makes you a hypocrite again.
Because I don't have any hang-ups on whether people are atheists or theists, whatever works for you thats fine with me, as long as it doesn't cause you to disrespect or devalue other people.
As a theist, I too love science(especially technological science) but there is a fine line between theoretical science and testable science...
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Oct, 2017 03:17 am
@Amoh5,
It might serve your purpose to classify atheism as an ideology. It's merely the antithesis of the ideology of theism which consists in a bunch of multifarious psychological and social structures centred on 'a creator'? Atheists simply don't need the concept of 'a creator'.
Your purpose is to attempt to put theism and atheism on a rational level playing field but as I suspect you realise, you haven't got a hope! And there is a fine line between respecting a person, and respecting their beliefs. Usually the second boils down to tolerance alone.
Amoh5
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Oct, 2017 05:41 am
@fresco,
Really?
As I also suspect that you realize that you haven't got any hope with your soapbox preaching of your own ideology, because its only according to your soapbox opinion
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Oct, 2017 05:44 am
@Amoh5,
You might want to rephrase that, so it's written in English and not gibberish.

You can say what you like about Fresco, but he always communicates clearly.
Amoh5
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Oct, 2017 06:06 am
@izzythepush,
Fresco talks a lot of crap as far as I'm concerned, and so do you
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Oct, 2017 06:32 am
@Amoh5,
Quote:
Fresco talks a lot of crap as far as I'm concerned, and so do you
.
Oh that I....the cherry picking one with allegience to a quasi-mythical guru? I think you mentioned that its chairmanship was established later in life.
It is of course a statistical fact that such elections are correlated with age and trauma.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2017 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/19/2017 at 11:22:44