Religion II

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Chapter and verse, please on your claim in the last paragraph. If the disciples had the Holy Spirit in them during Christ's ministry, how could Christ have promised to send The Helper after his departure?

The power to perform miracles was indeed granted by God to the disciples but that is a far cry from saying that the Holy Spirit lived within them during Christ's ministry.

Moreover, there was never a moment in Christ's life that he wasn't filled with the Holy Spirit. Luke 3:22 is simply recording the anointing of God upon Christ. This anointing was the official inauguration of Christ's 3-1/2-year ministry. The reason the Father was "well pleased" with his Son was precisely because Jesus always submitted to and followed the indwelling Holy Spirit. This is how he remained sinless. He was sinless from birth to ministry and from ministry to death and from resurrection even until now.

Total misdirection by you.....Shame, shame, shame....Oops, what was I thinking, you have no shame.

[traynor]

After reading a bit about the angelic interest in (apparently) "human" women, I am curious. Why were there no female "angels"? Not a simplistic question--the fraternization between "angels" and (apparently) "human" females suggests biological drives and intentions (and functions) on the part of the "angels." What would the purpose/usefulness of such be if there were no female angels?

Even stranger is that so few seem to consider such oddities as being odd.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

The same stubborn streak that exists in Boxcar, is the same stubbornness that exists in Jews who don't believe that Yeshua was, indeed, the Messiah......We ALL won't ever get anywhere until THIS is resolved.

Yeah...sure. The Christians should explain the Jewish religion to the Jews.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

The same stubborn streak that exists in Boxcar, is the same stubbornness that exists in Jews who don't believe that Yeshua was, indeed, the Messiah......We ALL won't ever get anywhere until THIS is resolved.

Stubborn about what exactly? Care to elucidate a wee bit?

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Yeah...sure. The Christians should explain the Jewish religion to the Jews.

Yep, it's all Greek to me....with some Hebrew and Aramaic as well..

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Stubborn about what exactly? Care to elucidate a wee bit?

Boxcar, you are a brother in Christ, but that's as far as it goes, we don't mix well. Let's just leave it at that...

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

The same stubborn streak that exists in Boxcar, is the same stubbornness that exists in Jews who don't believe that Yeshua was, indeed, the Messiah......We ALL won't ever get anywhere until THIS is resolved.

Thaskalos has a point, respectfully.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by traynor

After reading a bit about the angelic interest in (apparently) "human" women, I am curious. Why were there no female "angels"? Not a simplistic question--the fraternization between "angels" and (apparently) "human" females suggests biological drives and intentions (and functions) on the part of the "angels." What would the purpose/usefulness of such be if there were no female angels?

Even stranger is that so few seem to consider such oddities as being odd.

Angels were not meant to procreate. They are a fixed number.

Angels, watchers, who came to earth violated their nature. (Luke 20:35-36) Knowingly they were committing a grave act, that bound themselves with imprecations upon it. (1 Enoch 6:3-6)

Mankind is to take the place of the fallen angels in the celestial realm.

The children of this age marry and are given in marriage; but those who are deemed worthy to attain to the coming age and to the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. They can no longer die, for they are like angels; and they are the children of God because they are the ones who will rise
Luke 20:34-36

29. Thus it pleased God, Creator and Governor of the universe, that since the whole multitude of the angels had not perished in this desertion of him, those who had perished would remain forever in perdition, but those who had remained loyal through the revolt should go on rejoicing in the certain knowledge of the bliss forever theirs. From the other part of the rational creation—that is, mankind—although it had perished as a whole through sins and punishments, both original and personal, God had determined that a portion of it would be restored and would fill up the loss which that diabolical disaster had caused in the angelic society. For this is the promise to the saints at the resurrection, that they shall be equal to the angels of God.
St. Augustine's 'Enchiridion', Chapter 9 [emphasis added]

[Show Me the Wire]

Not a perception--an opinion. All it takes is one bite to dismiss that opinion, regardless of how it is otherwise (visually, whatever) perceived. Consider the perceptions induced by post-hypnotic suggestions (or religious hysteria). They are "real" to the subject, who "perceives" them to be real and will staunchly defend them as such. That "realness" is internal, subjective, and limited to the individual. Subjective reality, as opposed to objective, external, mostly-agreed-on, "consensus" reality. Which, in turn, others may well and correctly label as "just another illusion, regardless of how many accept it as being real."

I agree an opinion or belief should be justified, by mostly agreed consensus of what is reality.

The only facts are that you say there is a puddle of water on the ground, and my car has drops of water on it. The rest is conjecture, not fact.

Will there ever be enough facts, without the observer observing the event? Not only is there a puddle on the ground, drops of water on your car, the sound of thunder is heard, it is cloudy, and the grass is wet. Still not enough facts to factually say it rained.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Yeah...sure. The Christians should explain the Jewish religion to the Jews.

Someone has to do it. Someone has to inform them that the Messiah came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets and as such Old Covenant Judaism has become Fulfilled Judaism. The old things have passed away; all things are new in the Messiah.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Thaskalos has a point, respectfully.

Point taken, but it's still a problem, respectfully as well...

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Someone has to do it. Someone has to inform them that the Messiah came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets and as such Old Covenant Judaism has become Fulfilled Judaism. The old things have passed away; all things are new in the Messiah.

Sid Roth.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Always the dick in here, you are.

Keep mocking.

You may think it is mockery...but I don't... It is a legit question... Where did he go and how did he get there...?

I've never asked this nor heard an answer...Boxcar makes a big deal about being logical and factual, with his law of identity, and law of non-contradiction....I am just asking a simple question... What happened immediately after jesus "ascended"...?

And Christians want me to believe this fable...?
Oh, he just floated off into the sky....?

Do they ever stop to think about the ramifications of what they are saying is truth....?

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

I agree an opinion or belief should be justified, by mostly agreed consensus of what is reality.



Will there ever be enough facts, without the observer observing the event? Not only is there a puddle on the ground, drops of water on your car, the sound of thunder is heard, it is cloudy, and the grass is wet. Still not enough facts to factually say it rained.

Even direct observation may be insufficient, given the propensity of (most) people to see/hear/perceive what they want/need/hope to see/hear/perceive, and seriously distort the rest of it with self-serving biases and prejudices. There are many reasons why I have ("so little faith in" is probably a more gentle way to phrase it than "such disdain for") "reported observations." I will bypass all the long, boring, convoluted explanations of why I think as I do, but it is not something I do lightly. I am a very curious person, and I have spent much of my life learning how to observe/perceive/think (relatively) objectively.

Additionally, given the propensity of people toward social learning and social validation, I think even less of "multiple witnesses" if those multiple witnesses have interacted or associated in ANY way after the event/phenomena "witnessed."

You may find various works on constructed memories interesting.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Angels were not meant to procreate. They are a fixed number.

Angels, watchers, who came to earth violated their nature. (Luke 20:35-36) Knowingly they were committing a grave act, that bound themselves with imprecations upon it. (1 Enoch 6:3-6)

Mankind is to take the place of the fallen angels in the celestial realm.

The children of this age marry and are given in marriage; but those who are deemed worthy to attain to the coming age and to the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. They can no longer die, for they are like angels; and they are the children of God because they are the ones who will rise
Luke 20:34-36

29. Thus it pleased God, Creator and Governor of the universe, that since the whole multitude of the angels had not perished in this desertion of him, those who had perished would remain forever in perdition, but those who had remained loyal through the revolt should go on rejoicing in the certain knowledge of the bliss forever theirs. From the other part of the rational creation—that is, mankind—although it had perished as a whole through sins and punishments, both original and personal, God had determined that a portion of it would be restored and would fill up the loss which that diabolical disaster had caused in the angelic society. For this is the promise to the saints at the resurrection, that they shall be equal to the angels of God.
St. Augustine's 'Enchiridion', Chapter 9 [emphasis added]

Please, please tell me that you do not personally BELIEVE in the above, do you...? If you do, I'm not going to take anything you post from now on seriously...