Tired_Old_Man

So letting people on death row die when other states show a high percentage of innocent people on death row, and bombing innocent civilians is "the fruit BuSh bears" to prove that he belongs to Jesus? How come you (claim to) see through Hitler, but you can't see through BuSh?

I don't know if anyone has heard the news, but there is a claim that the boxes that Jesus and his family were buried in have been found. "While the Bible tells the story of Jesus and his resurrection, this box could show physical evidence that he existed, was buried and that he had a son, Judah." While that might upset those that believe in the word for word Bible, it will not interfere with my faith, because, I don't care if it was the human body of Jesus that was resurrected or a hologram type image that one could put their hand through It is all the same to me. I guess some group will come out with a new connotation of the word “resurrected” (was that in Greek, Hebrew of Aramaic?), so that the people who need a literal Bible can say, "I told you so", while others will deny any facts that may be shown "as science run a muck". It is nice to know that until "Global Warming" destroys the Earth (or at least its ability to support human life), there will be something interesting to debate.

The Bible can teach whatever someone wants to believe it teaches, but many people claim to be in communication with Jesus and still do some horrific things. Not only don't they do good works, but they do evil deeds.

Would it not be accurate to say that someone who was saved by Jesus, but then did no good works and in fact, reverted to doing bad works might knock that someone out of Heaven? And would someone who believes in Jesus use "Shock & Awe" on civilians in the country where the "Garden of Eden" was? And on the direct descendants of Adam and Eve, to boot?

Thank you. I get most of this stuff right out of my head. The opinions, I mean. I had not heard of Thales, but I will try to read up on him. I also discussed the "turned off" genes which comprises the majority of a human's DNA and why would God have inserted so much waste in us if he made us in his image in the thread on evolution versus Intelligent Design. Physical Image, I meant.

Then why did they use a Hebrew word that means "to rest", when a Hebrew work for "decided to admire his handiwork" or "took a break" or "stopped" would have done? You can not have it both ways. The Bible is either literal or it isn't. If it is literal when it suits you and requires context (another way of saying interpretation) when it suits you, then I would hate to play poker with you.

Typo: I meant to write: Just as God said that the people of Israel were his chosen people, I believe Jesus chose the poor and infirm as his chosen people.

Double talk. "to shade; a phantom, illusion, resemblance, a representative figure" does not mean spirit. It could mean anything you want it to mean. I think the only illusion here is the illusion that one can take words from ancient languages and squeeze whatever is needed to be heard out of them. Genesis 2: 1: Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2: And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. Why would a spirit have to rest? Why would an ALMIGHTY GOD have to rest? Requiring rest makes God less than Almighty and less than a God.

And without food, the poor would not live long enough to be saved. And slaves didn't get much chance to exercise free will either in order to learn the teachings of Jesus.. Jesus spent a large percentage of his time helping the poor and saying things that promoted the poor to a higher level than the powerful and rich. Just as God said that the people of Israel were his chosen people, I believe Jesus said that the poor and infirm were his chosen people.

I was dead serious. Serious to show that the Bible is not word for word true. The need for man to be in God's image was what was needed by the primitive people of the time. It was what was supposed to separate us from (other) animals in such a way that early man could feel superior to animals, though except for brain power, man is inferior to most of the animal kingdom.

So the Bible is not word for word accurate. "God created us in His spiritual image"? Genesis: 26: And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. I took this from the King James Version. I believe you referred to it as the "gold standard" or some other endearing term and they left out the word "spiritual".

Neither my wife, Tina, nor I based our love or marriage on my weight, my size or hers, but losing weight makes life easier. I promised her, about 15 or twenty years ago, that I would be around for our 50th wedding anniversay. I've got 10 years, 4 months and 9 days to go. If I had not lost weight, I doubt that I would have a chance at being around for the big 5 0.

Or you could say that he spent an hour flirting with girls right in front of you. No matter how much you weigh, you are a person of value. Do not devalue yourself jumping from one person to another constantly seeking their approval. Please seek help. You are letting your appearance and the attention of other people control you.

Genesis: 26: And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Since God created everything, it is probably safe to assume, that there was nothing except God at one time. So let's examine what God must look like. Why would God have a nose? Does God need air? Where was the air? How does God breath in space? Why does God need eyes? Does not he have the ability to see what is invisible and what is in my heart and mind? What was there to look at before he created anything? Why does God have ears? Can't he hear what is in my mind? How would the sound be transported without air? What was there to hear before he created anything? Why does God have a mouth? Can't he put words into my mind that no one else can hear? How would his voice be transmitted without air between Heaven and the Earth? Does He need a mouth to eat? What does He eat? What did He eat before He created all the things that He would be able to eat? Before Genesis, I mean? There are only four purposes of a mouth. To breath, to eat, to speak and to kiss (or similar use). With no air there would be nothing to breath and nothing to transmit sound, leaving only eating and kissing. But as explained in the last paragraph, there was nothing to eat, because God hadn't created food yet and no one to kiss. Did God have arms and hands? What was there to hold before he created anything? The need for a stomach and lungs are therefor not required. And the need for a heart is to transport oxygen and nutrients around the body, but no air equals no oxygen and since there was no food, God didn't need a heart (or blood either). Why did God have a penis? There are only three purposes of a penis and since God neither ate nor drank and since he didn't procreate, I doubt if the third use was considered. Some might claim that he was called the master because of his habit of the third use, but I doubt it. Now we can be pretty sure that God had no rectum for all the reasons stated above. Did God have feet? What was there to walk on before he created anything? My point is that if we are created in God's image, why did God have all these unneeded parts? Could it be that God is a one celled amoeba that is millions of miles in length and diameter, with a huge brain. Maybe he did create man in that image and maybe each day in Genesis is actually billions of years and it took billions of years for the amoebas to evolve into humans. Also, if man was created in the image of God, why is he so defective? Wouldn't God have given the best of everything; eyes, ears, etc. to man? Man is probably the weakest animal (pound for pound) on the planet. Many animals have superior eyes. Many animals have superior hearing and many animals have a superior sense of smell. Most of the senses of man are inferior to what animals have. Man is also unable to deal with nature without covering. Most animals do fine with their skin as their only requirement for dealing with nature. If man is created in God's image, is God also so defective? Many might see this as mocking God. No, it is asking intelligent questions with the one thing that the literal (word for word) Bible advocates and the allegorical Bible advocates agree on; that humans have the best of; MY BRAIN.

Yesterday at church, we spoke about the two kinds of Christians: #1. The God Fearing kind #2. The God Loving kind The #1's will be quick to tell you how much they Love God and Love Jesus, but they preach fear. The #2's do not fear God. They do the work of Jesus, helping their fellow man, searching for peace and looking out for their brethren (of any faith, race or nationality), not because they fear the consequences, but because it is the "Christian" thing to do. We also spoke of three kinds of people Type A: People who do bad things Type B: People who not do bad things because they fear being arrested or ostracized Type C: People who not do bad things because they want to do good The people at my church fellowship try to be 2C type people.

I hate it when companies help to bastardize the language in order to get a one-up on the competition. Example: I go into a fast food place and ask for a Medium coffee. They give me a very small cup. I ask them what the small cup looks like and they tell me that they do not carry small. "So this is your small cup" I say. "No it is medium." "Is this the smallest cup that you have?" "Yes, but it is medium." "Do you know what the word 'medium' means?" "Yes. The size of this cup." "No, it means something in the middle. This cup can not be a medium if there is nothing smaller." Many years ago, when I was about 10 or 11, my mother sent me to the drugstore on our block and told me to buy a "Large" tube of toothpaste (I believe Pepsodent, but it is not important). I came back with a very small tube. Back in those days (mid 1950's) the companies were on a kick similar to the coffee cup story I just related, so that brand of toothpaste came in Large, Giant size and Family size, but how was I a child or my mother to know that small and medium were nonexistent? When I was 22, I took a part time job in an auto parts store to help pay for the birth of my son, which was not covered by my medical plan because I had only been working as an aircraft mechanic for 5 months when he was born. My best friend used to drag race cars at the drag-strip and he had been having a run of bad luck (he thought). He had blown his 327 Chevy engine 3 weeks in a row and he had to rebuild the engine each week. He had been going into the auto parts store where I just started working each week and asking the older man who worked there for "Heavy Duty" rod and main bearings for a 1964 327 Chevy engine. When he came in this time he asked me for the same thing. When I looked it up in the catalog, I found that "Heavy Duty" was the cheapest bearings that the company made. The description was: "Heavy Duty"; an economical grade just below OEM (manufacturer's specifications). The bearings were listed as "Heavy Duty", OEM, Quality and Clevite (Racing quality) in order of ascending quality. What is wrong with the terms small, medium and large? Why is "Heavy Duty" actually the lowest quality.

Who said that people were praying to the dead bodies of Mary (the Mother) or Saint Teresa? They would be praying to the souls of Mary and Saint Teresa in Heaven to intercede with the Father. So is the "Our Father" the only prayer allowed? I have asked Jesus to help me understand him. Should I have asked God to help me understand his wishes and then mentioned the name of Jesus in a name dropping sort of way? You know Ron, IMHO, you do not give God enough credit for intelligence. I firmly believe that God is much bigger than these small minded arguments and that he looks at intention more than form. I had a argument with my wife once. I asked her "In which case would you be more angry? If you were sitting in the movies and a man came in and took a shot at you, but missed or if a lady sitting down the row from you in the movies, while attempting to pass you on the way to the rest-room, stepped on and broke your toe? Who would you be more angry at? I am sure if God was at the movies, he would strike the shooter cold, but would forgive the women. Your explanations say to me, that the women would be in equal or more trouble with God. Neither person did it right. TOM PS: Tina said that she would be angrier at the women.

The idea is not to win the war, but to stay at war. Orwell said it best: War, it will be seen, is now a purely internal affair. In the past, the ruling groups of all countries, although they might recognize their common interest and therefore limit the destructiveness of war, did fight against one another, and the victor always plundered the vanquished. In our own day they are not fighting against one another at all. The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact. The very word "war," therefore, has become misleading. It would probably be accurate to say that by becoming continuous war has ceased to exist... ..."WAR IS PEACE".

Why is Saint Teresa dead. Do you not believe in eternal life? Why can't Saint Teresa pray for someone during her eternal life in Heaven? Who says that Saint Teresa is not praying to Jesus? Is not Jesus God?

You are evading an important aspect of the conversation. If a person follows all of the teachings of the Roman Catholic church, can (s)he go to Heaven? That person would not be following what you belief to be the truth, but is it not enough to have a good heart, believe in Jesus and live as close as you can to His teachings? Or must it be done another way?

You didn't hear Jesus say the things he is supposed to have said, and you didn't hear Matthew, Mark and John first hand either. You have read hand me downs that Matthew, Mark and John allegely said that Jesus said and did. You just said it though you may deny that was your intent: "Faith is not good enough for you". You need it proved, but the Bible can not be proved, so faith is all that we have. Not even your own memory can be trusted. Eyewitness accounts to crimes are highly unreliable. Eyewitness accounts of catastrophes and memorable events are highly unreliable and not always so memorable. But a book written 6,000 years ago and another written 2,000 years ago are perfect? And only the version of the books, that you believe in, are perfect? No, faith is needed. You are confusing faith with knowledge. And the only knowledge that you have is a cat chasing its own tail; the Bible is only divinely inspired because the Bible says it is and only a divinely inspired book could be totally true and because the Bible is totally true, it is divinely inspired. I will stick with my faith. My faith can not be shaken, but if something comes around to disprove some event from the Bible, you will have too choices; deny the event or give up the belief in your knowledge. I will bet on denial.

I find it discouraging that you did not hear Jesus says those words, but you act as if you did. None of the Gospels were written during the lifetime of Jesus. No one took notes on their "BlackBerry" or "Palm Pilot". I believe that no Gospel was written for about 30 years after the death of Christ and some where not written until about 100 years after the Crucifixion. Many Gospels were written by people who heard them by word of mouth. There was also a political battle much like you see on this thread between the 13 disciples. The 13th disciple who never actually met Jesus, was in competition to build his church. Who knows what shortcuts were taken and what shadings were done to the words and deeds of Jesus in order to fatten the flock? But, I will believe on faith, that following most of what I read as what Jesus said was true. There are contradictory words attributed to Jesus. I will not and do not belief the God knew, before Genesis, everything I was ever going to do or say. Or that Jesus or God chose me to be saved. But I have faith that I will make it. You need not try to convince me that I should accept your literal wording of the Bible. I have faith that the God of the "Old Testament" was also colored by the writers of their time with their prejudices. The God of the "Old Testament" was not a very nice person, let alone a nice God. He was as different from Jesus as a 747 is from a Chevy Pickup truck. I also have belief that the Muslims who read the Qur'an as it was written, not as the radical clerics espouse it will gain salvation as will Jews who never accept Christ as their personal Saviour. I do not need scriptures to be a charitable man. I am not speaking of money, but about good will towards people of good will. I belief in the Golden Rule. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Ron, do not push your believes unto others. You may be right, but it is not for you to say. And yes, you can keep your believes to yourself. Feel good about being saved, but stop making others feel bad because you do not think that they are saved (or in the case of atheists that they either want to or need to be saved).

I just have to laugh when someone (or some group) sues a manufacturer and the manufacturer says that "you bought our product of your own free will". It cost $5,200,000 for a one minute commercial during the Super Bowl. It cost $2,600,000 for a 30 second commercial during the Super Bowl. It cost about $900,000 for a 10 second commercial during the Super Bowl. That is not counting the production costs to make the commercial which cost as much as another $1,000,000 though usually "only" about a quarter of that. Does anyone believe that the people who put commercials on the Super Bowl were doing it to spread the money around? They spent that money to get us to buy their products. They hire psychologists and other experts on human behavior to know what to put into the adds to induce us to buy their products. They are at war with our minds. They are winning.

I wonder if they would get stoned driving through Alabama.

No offense taken. Just setting the record straight. TommyO might be pissed off though.:faint: