Yet you still talk as if it's 100% true. If you're gonna argue. Argue knowing that there's a possibility that you might be completely wrong, but you believe you're right. Then I won't call you ignorant. Otherwise, you're basically telling me "i'm wrong, this is fact, and that's all there is too it"

The only time you should argue like you're 100% correct is when you have substantial evidence that you are indeed 100% correct.

And I know you can agree with that in someway.

__________________

Sorry to break your heart Q and Apexx, but ima call this girl up and stop posting in this thread. Awwww I know I know, it's not a party without Jack. But I might come back in and say something amazingly fucking cool later.

__________________

That's a moot point. Up until about 400 years ago, we "knew" that the earth was flat. It's obvious that there's a chance that human logic and represenation of an eternal God can be skewed. That doesn',t however, take away from the fact that God exists. And, again, whether or not I believe in something doesn't take away from the fact that it's true. As a matter of faith, choose what you will believe. But, every man has an innate "homing device" that God's given to nudge you to that fact. GOD IS REAL. People resist that. But, they know it's true. Those who choose to follow their logic realize they lack that fulfillment that only God can give. Thats why so many people turn to drugs and sex and everything elsefor comfort. They're attempting to fill a void only God can fill.


When it's your time to turn to God, you will. That's everyone. The bible says no man can come to come (accept him and walk in truth) unless God calls him first. We don't have the mind to otherwise.

im convinced you don't know what you're talking about. but then again, if you didnt' see something, how would you know it exists?

the bible states "ye are gods". in the bible, Jesus also states that he is not, nor is of, a man-like god, and all persons on this planet are capable of far greater things than he's ever done. Jesus was a Gnostic who learned under the wise Gamaliel before some members of a pagan cult called catholocism claimed he was theirs. that pagan cult stole the basic fundamental of an infinite and eternal conciousness that is everywher and nowhere, and that is the trait they gave to their "god" who in following with pagan practices, is man-like. gnostics don't endorse that what so ever, neither did jesus, neither did any of the apostles, yet christianity and catholocism claims them as followers of a religion that didnt' exist till AFTER they died.

this is how deep the trickery goes. its one of those things that's so obvious that when you observe it you go "wow, how didn't i see that before?".

__________________

You see what I fucking mean? Lmao.. seriously.

__________________

No...you simply restated my postulation with different terminology.

Example:

I said..."It's obvious that human representation of God can be skewed."

You restated it: "It could be..."

Adding "can be" in place of COULD BE is the same thing bro.





1

*sigh*

Jesus often spoke in metas as i believe you know. and i as i believe you know
most of the text in the bible is not to be taken literal, nor is it to be read then applied. much of the text has a far deeper meaning that can only be seen after
it has been studied. as yes he did say that but he said that with the meaning only through the father can we acheive far greater things than he.

__________________

O Know, He's Back!

no, people become extremists because they believe what they feel is true. they believe they are the "chosen ones" and everyone else is an infidel, that everyone is out to get you. that no one else can co-exist. that's a function of egologic, meaning "me vs you" and "if its not with me its agianst me". religion in at its core is ignorance, and teaches you to absorb ignorance and onesided-ism and believe you are above everyone else instead of on the same level as everyone else.

if you hate somebody or some movement or anything, and you know less about their side of the story than you know about your side of the story, you are a fool. if all you see is your side of it you truely are a fool. you commit your self to only one side of a 3 sided story, so you really have no understanding, just an opinion. when you have one side, you have an opinion. when you have two sides, you have a fact. when you have 3 sides, you have an understanding, an acceptance and, dare i say, a peace with it.

knowlege is power. one side is ignorance.

__________________

and i've heard many "tales" of jesus studing with so and so are was part of
so so group so your statement is effective in no way, a muslium could come and tell
me hey he was only another moses, as they believe, or the da vinci code as many now believe and the stories go on and on

__________________

O Know, He's Back!

aye...gotta run peeps



hold it down






1

word, gotta call my girlie in a few....
but i'm not the type to be like no no no thats WRONG
i myself was catholic,its not till i opened my eyes that i saw
what was wrong and found truth for myself, the real Jesus .

__________________

O Know, He's Back!

no. jesus never spoke in metaphors. you dont understand the simple logic of what he's saying so you think "it must be a metaphor!". if you believe something he's saying is metaphorical and cloudy instead of literal and specific, you suffer from a lack of understanding and even more lethally, a lack of knowledge. the typical thinking of a fool "its too simple, so it can't be so". sometimes, doing something simple is the hardest thing you can do.

now on a seperate note, what you've said before was illogical. by your logic "going to the father" what ever you interpret that to mean, would make you a god and more powerful than jesus, which no one in biblical history has ever said so.. once again, your view comes from a perspective of non-understanding and "half knowledge" meaning you think you get it.

please dude, i gave lots of refferences you can look up to gian true knowledge. if you are really in persuit of knowledge as you claim to be (you're really jsut in persuit of "being right") equip your self with it. look up the side of the people who disagree with you, and agree with you. if you try to filter your input in one position or another, you're a fool.

__________________

ummm, yes he did, i'm starting to believe you've maybe picked up the bible once
one of his most famous metas is about himself when he says "I am" which is also the name for God.

more?
"I am the bread of life."
"I am the light of the world."
"I am the gate."
"I am the vine, you are the branches."

i could go on, but yes he did he also used Similes but most famously parables.
tons of them in the bible...half understanding? there right there in text...

__________________

O Know, He's Back!

right. the only difference is, there is limitless accounts on historical record of the origins of "christianity" and "cahtolocism" is gnosticism. once again, you didn't see it, so therefore you believe its not true. typical egologic; "i don't see it, there fore it doesn't exist". thoughts liek that is why people thought the earth was flat. or the sun revolved around the earth. or that gravity doesn't exist, and that air and wind are "god", and so on lol.

primitive minds pickling in their own ignorance.

to take it even further, theres evidence that gamaliel led the apostles, the bible even states so directly. now imagine a man so wise that jesus would hand over the leadership of the apostles to him. gamaleil in the bible is refered to as "the great teacher" yet the bible omits who he's taught because whomever edited it obviously if it was left in there you'd be able to put 2 and 2 together. but we know that jesus knew him, AND trusted him enough to lead the apostles!! now jesus wouldnt' trust a stranger, would he? a man he's had noexperience and interaction with, would he? hell, even a man the apostles had never met before now would he? wow, what a coincidence, the bible even omits the entire span of jesus' life where he "grew up". all you know is he was born, then disappeared for a while, and came back with knowledge of the source all things (or came back as what you would call a "source-erer" today). and in typical fool fashion you're perfectly complaicent with believing that's all that happened.

its pathetic man.

you're not even factually qualified to have this level of a discussion with me if you still believe "jesus" was really dudes name.

please, once again, equip your self with knowledge.

__________________