Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(November 24, 2015 at 6:12 pm)dyresand Wrote: Because Dirch when it comes down to it let's say if god existed the notion of justice is thrown out the window.
You can go and pillage rape steal etc. then all you have to do is pray to god and accept jesus and be saved from your transgressions.
With that way thinking it is dangerous yet your book says do no to this do not do that and why is that a country that is mostly christians and christians are a heavy majority in jail. While get this atheists and mostly secular non god believing countries have less crime and overall are doing much more better. One would wonder the idea of hell should scare anyone to getting on the right path but why is it that non believers and atheists make better christians than actual christians who follow the bible.
(November 25, 2015 at 11:31 am)SofaKingHigh Wrote:
(November 25, 2015 at 11:22 am)Drich Wrote: I'm telling we can. their is no debate when you experience this for yourself. The debate comes when someone who does not want this to be true ignores and discounts everything God has done and refuses to seek God themselves. Prayer nor any of your examples of petitioning God for favors is not what I am talking about. although that in my case with an ongoing Cancer diagnostic and AIDS has been true so far.. I am talking about literally receiving a measure or portion of the Holy Spirit, to direct Guide and teach you. A portion of What I do here is a direct reflection of that. I answer questions confront supposed contradictions and faith ending paradoxes, the same stuff that took most/all of you out spiritually I've been given answers to. Most of which would be miles over my head. And the part that I know is from God comes from the fact that I get an answer or direction first, then google supporting material/references. This includes knowledge of languages I do not speak nor have formally studied, knowledge of ancient cities, placement, culture. knowledge of historical figures, and historical documents. Stuff, time, people none of which have I ever studied. Then I google an idea or key word that I'm given, and I find 'proof' that what I've been given is indeed document historical fact.
IDK if it was you or someone else that called what I do the 'drich rope a dope.' Where one of you thinks you got me on the ropes with some fact or concept that your pushing, and all of the sudden 'boom' I lay out something that just destroys the opposition's argument. 9 times out of 10 that is not intentional. I simply go with what God gives me, when he gives it to me. Yes I choose my words very carfully, because I know I must honor what I have been given to understand completely in order for God to fully support what it is I do here. Otherwise I would not be able to stand and defend what I believe with my current level of education.
When you/I have the Holy Spirit the 'proof' comes in the way of knowledge first. Not just one or twice or even a few times... I've been defending the faith for almost 10 years now, and little has changed from the first post to this one. Granted I have learned a tremoundous amount (It sounds strange, but by answering your questions I learn things I never knew.) this knowledge/wisdom is far beyond my own limits, which are known by me. and, because I know my limits and see the things I am able to do despite my limits (day in day out over the period of years/almost a decade) I find/found the proof I needed.. I know it may not be enough for you to hear me talk about it, but Imagine if you could experience what I have described for yourself, or something equally as amazing daily. Something far above and beyond your limits and abilities. would this be proof for you?
That is what Christ offers in Luke 11... That level of 'proof' if we simply A/S/K for it and remain faithful to what he gives.
The parameters of my killing an immortal are all found back in that post.
What is lust? it's a thought is it not? Are you telling me that not having full control over your thoughts has nothing to do with 'free will?' I would think 'free will' would start at having complete control over how I think. But to you and your version of 'free will' not having control of your thoughts is 'proof' of your free will? how does that work?
Could you describe an instance of you receiving a portion of the holy spirit please? Genuinely interested.
The above mentioned "rope a dope" is an example of a gift of the Spirit. In that I am given to understand principles/answer questions about God/the church and even the time period/what is recorded in secular history, and insights to Hebrew/koine greek before I have actually looked it up or have any prior understanding of the subject..
I'm given an answer almost before I can finish reading the question. Then I look up my answer and pair it with the correct source material that proves what I was given was indeed factual/correct.
A real good example of this was the fact that someone pointed out that some great anti-theist/bible expert for you guys said that the Paul of Acts did not behave or teach the same things that Paul who wrote Romans did. then the 'expert' cites Acts 17 and Romans 1. In acts 17 the point was made that Paul here says all sins/idol worship of the pagan were over looked, while in romans 1 the sins of the idol worshiping pagan were not...
I honestly never heard or read this expert before I never heard the claim that the Paul the book of Acts describes is completely different than the Paul of the book of Romans, nor have I ever seen Acts 17 and any teaching out of the book of Romans used that way before...
About me: It may supprise many of you, but I do not consider myself a very good student of theology. I don't have ANY verses memorized. I have vague ideas about what each book of the bible are about, some are accurate some are not. So when someone tells me the book of acts says X I have to look it up. I have to look up everything. Not to mention I do not read any works outside of the bible. I do not know the teachings of any theologians at all nor anti-theologians (don't know really what to call them.) The only exposure I get is what I hear on the radio (if I can stand to listen to them) or what you guys post here.
So appearently I was told the guy/expert who made the claim that the paul of romans and the paul of acts were not the same person because they did not teach the same thing, was a real thorn in the side of many theist. I also looked up that many 'theist' have no credible answer for his charges. Even so I thought what was quoted by this guys was the dumbest thing I ever heard. Why? because I could see what I thought was an obvious link that tied the teaching of Romans 1 and Acts 17 together, but he was intentionally hiding this link. which to me made him a basless clown and appearently because I saw him as a clown, I did not show the proper 'respect' for this guy and his work. because a couple of you came unglued when my simple observation shot down this guys life work. then I has to explain my (not so) 'simple explaination 2 or 3 different ways 2 or 3 times aday for a week till it finally sunk in. (That Paul was talking about in Acts 17 was about a pre Christ act of grace to a people who knew nothing of God, verses a Post Christ call for accountability and faith from those who heard of Christ. then Paul further subdivides the sin of this act from the evil of the very same act.
In order to make this distinction I was 'given' knowledge of the greek before I looked it up, I knew the words being translated to the same word in the English was not the same word/different meaning in the greek. I just did not know what words were being used. so I looked everything up and posted the results. Which framed the two passages so they would compliment each other rather than contradict. which completely underminded what the 'expert' claimed.
Again one very small example that playout over the course of a week and was test a few dozen different times and different ways, without my explanation loosing it's integrity.
My knowledge of Hell is another good example. I have a hell thread here were I posted my experience of the place, and all of it at the time was contary to everything I ever thought about Hell. But over the years I've studied it in detail and it turns out that everything I 'witnessed' in my dream was biblically accurate. My experience was 180* oppsite of what I understood Hell to be, and before that moment I'd never heard or witnessed anything that said Hell was NOT the picture of dante' inferno I had in my mind. Yet, looking back I was given a picture of Hell that the bible describes before I knew anything of the bible or God.
I have 20+ years of stuff like this. being privy to knowledge well beyond my scope. Which again, is not because I am special. I simply took God up on His offer, and was faithful to what I was given through thick and thin. The same offer He has offered all of us.
November 25, 2015 at 10:51 pm (This post was last modified: November 25, 2015 at 11:08 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)
Hitler arrives in Hell, Hell is now not only an abyss of everlasting misery and screaming anguish, now Hitler is there too! It is Hell plus Hitler, whereas before, it was Hell minus Hitler.
Hell plus Hitler sounds like a worse place to me than Hell minus Hitler, because Hitler is there, and he's Hitler. Hitler makes Hell a worse place by his presence, which means that it wasn't truly Hell until Hitler showed up, and in fact, if this place exists, it still isn't Hell because there are plenty of sinners yet to go there and make it worse.
Considering that, as I understand it, God plans to end the world at some point, and from that point forward, all the people who ever lived will either be in Heaven or Hell. This means that God is working with a finite number of people. If there are a finite amount of sinners in Hell, then there is also a theoretical infinite amount, it is always possible to add an additional sinner and increase the horribleness of Hell, in terms of the amount of sin present (sin being apparently innate in humans) as well as the amount of suffering being inflicted.
God can never make Hell the worst place imaginable, no matter how many sinners are in Hell, he can always only add one more, infinitely.
God, as 'all knowing' would therefore be able to anticipate a given sinners final configuration after an infinite period of infinite torment and then be able, at the instant of arrival in hell, to instill that final state instantly.
It would encompass all possible permutations of evil, tortures, unpleasantness, and demonic depredations and deprivations. So, I'm thinking hell might actually work a little differently than is conventionally imagined.
In a way, this concept of hell is worse, as God would be using higher math (calculus, integrals, and probably Bessellian elements) to derive the end state condition of arriving sinners, and rather than ramping up to their ultimate reward for their corruption over an infinite period of time, they would instead absorb all of it at once, and from then on, for an infinite period of time, they would be infinitely punished.
If you do the math, this is WAY worse.
[shudder]
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
(November 25, 2015 at 11:31 am)SofaKingHigh Wrote: Could you describe an instance of you receiving a portion of the holy spirit please? Genuinely interested.
The above mentioned "rope a dope" is an example of a gift of the Spirit. In that I am given to understand principles/answer questions about God/the church and even the time period/what is recorded in secular history, and insights to Hebrew/koine greek before I have actually looked it up or have any prior understanding of the subject..
I'm given an answer almost before I can finish reading the question. Then I look up my answer and pair it with the correct source material that proves what I was given was indeed factual/correct.
A real good example of this was the fact that someone pointed out that some great anti-theist/bible expert for you guys said that the Paul of Acts did not behave or teach the same things that Paul who wrote Romans did. then the 'expert' cites Acts 17 and Romans 1. In acts 17 the point was made that Paul here says all sins/idol worship of the pagan were over looked, while in romans 1 the sins of the idol worshiping pagan were not...
I honestly never heard or read this expert before I never heard the claim that the Paul the book of Acts describes is completely different than the Paul of the book of Romans, nor have I ever seen Acts 17 and any teaching out of the book of Romans used that way before...
About me: It may supprise many of you, but I do not consider myself a very good student of theology. I don't have ANY verses memorized. I have vague ideas about what each book of the bible are about, some are accurate some are not. So when someone tells me the book of acts says X I have to look it up. I have to look up everything. Not to mention I do not read any works outside of the bible. I do not know the teachings of any theologians at all nor anti-theologians (don't know really what to call them.) The only exposure I get is what I hear on the radio (if I can stand to listen to them) or what you guys post here.
So appearently I was told the guy/expert who made the claim that the paul of romans and the paul of acts were not the same person because they did not teach the same thing, was a real thorn in the side of many theist. I also looked up that many 'theist' have no credible answer for his charges. Even so I thought what was quoted by this guys was the dumbest thing I ever heard. Why? because I could see what I thought was an obvious link that tied the teaching of Romans 1 and Acts 17 together, but he was intentionally hiding this link. which to me made him a basless clown and appearently because I saw him as a clown, I did not show the proper 'respect' for this guy and his work. because a couple of you came unglued when my simple observation shot down this guys life work. then I has to explain my (not so) 'simple explaination 2 or 3 different ways 2 or 3 times aday for a week till it finally sunk in. (That Paul was talking about in Acts 17 was about a pre Christ act of grace to a people who knew nothing of God, verses a Post Christ call for accountability and faith from those who heard of Christ. then Paul further subdivides the sin of this act from the evil of the very same act.
In order to make this distinction I was 'given' knowledge of the greek before I looked it up, I knew the words being translated to the same word in the English was not the same word/different meaning in the greek. I just did not know what words were being used. so I looked everything up and posted the results. Which framed the two passages so they would compliment each other rather than contradict. which completely underminded what the 'expert' claimed.
Again one very small example that playout over the course of a week and was test a few dozen different times and different ways, without my explanation loosing it's integrity.
My knowledge of Hell is another good example. I have a hell thread here were I posted my experience of the place, and all of it at the time was contary to everything I ever thought about Hell. But over the years I've studied it in detail and it turns out that everything I 'witnessed' in my dream was biblically accurate. My experience was 180* oppsite of what I understood Hell to be, and before that moment I'd never heard or witnessed anything that said Hell was NOT the picture of dante' inferno I had in my mind. Yet, looking back I was given a picture of Hell that the bible describes before I knew anything of the bible or God.
I have 20+ years of stuff like this. being privy to knowledge well beyond my scope. Which again, is not because I am special. I simply took God up on His offer, and was faithful to what I was given through thick and thin. The same offer He has offered all of us.
(November 25, 2015 at 11:25 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: Worse to the point that it exceeds human comprehension.
Seems like this would over joy the pious. Hell being staggeringly and majestically worse than previously anticipated has got to be the best news they've received in a long time.
The idea before, infinite torment over infinite time, means after 1/2 of an infinite amount of time, a given damned soul would only be 1/2 punished. With this new and improved understanding, that infinite punishment for an infinite period time can be distilled and imbued upon sinners instantaneously upon their arrival in hell, meaning they will be experiencing the sum of their infinite torments for an infinite amount of time from the get go.
No 'ramping up' on it, if you will, you start off with all the meters pegged, and they stay there.
This is WAY worse.
For instance, a specific torment like being administered a molten lava enema everyday for billions and billions and trillions of centuries, can be instead, delivered all at once. You would not be sequentially punished, in other words, all punishment would be inflicted upon delivery of your IMMORTAL soul in the first 1X10^-43 of a second. You would then spend an eternal eternity at that maximum level of already having been punished infinitely.
In the first interpretation, it takes an infinite amount of time for the infinite punishments to accrue, now, those infinite punishments in their totality would be understood to be experienced for that infinite duration.
This is infinitely worse.
Praise Jesus !!
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
November 26, 2015 at 4:27 pm (This post was last modified: November 26, 2015 at 4:27 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)
(November 26, 2015 at 11:07 am)vorlon13 Wrote:
Seems like this would over joy the pious. Hell being staggeringly and majestically worse than previously anticipated has got to be the best news they've received in a long time.
The idea before, infinite torment over infinite time, means after 1/2 of an infinite amount of time, a given damned soul would only be 1/2 punished. With this new and improved understanding, that infinite punishment for an infinite period time can be distilled and imbued upon sinners instantaneously upon their arrival in hell, meaning they will be experiencing the sum of their infinite torments for an infinite amount of time from the get go.
No 'ramping up' on it, if you will, you start off with all the meters pegged, and they stay there.
This is WAY worse.
For instance, a specific torment like being administered a molten lava enema everyday for billions and billions and trillions of centuries, can be instead, delivered all at once. You would not be sequentially punished, in other words, all punishment would be inflicted upon delivery of your IMMORTAL soul in the first 1X10^-43 of a second. You would then spend an eternal eternity at that maximum level of already having been punished infinitely.
In the first interpretation, it takes an infinite amount of time for the infinite punishments to accrue, now, those infinite punishments in their totality would be understood to be experienced for that infinite duration.
![[Image: 3435721.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.mememaker.net%2Fstatic%2Fimages%2Fmemes%2F3435721.jpg)
