News
news Canadian Police Search for Multiple Gunmen Following Shootings at Parliament and the National War Memorial
news Japan firm showcases Bat-Signal of the future
news Mystery Flying Man Spooks Pilots over Britain
news The season you're born in affects your moodiness, study says
news New York City's Rats Are Carrying Viruses No One's Seen Before
news UFOs in West Virginia: 10 witnesses, 4 low-flying UFOs, 3 big as football fields
news Mysterious Spontaneous Combustions Return to Sicilian City
news X-37B Military Space Plane Lands After Record-Shattering Secret Mission
news Syrian Ambassador Calls ISIS An ‘American Myth’
news Genetic engineering will one day create the smartest humans who have ever lived.
news FBI Wants Encryption Regulated

Advertisement



Poll: Public Poll: Do you believe in God? (don't answer until you read the post in my signature and then explain why you chose yes or not)
Yes, after reading post in your sig.
No, after reading post in your sig.
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Username:
Password: or Register
 
Thread Rating:
  • 278 Vote(s) - 1.62 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Easy Religion in a Nutshell
FreedomStands
Registered User
User ID: 14247
02-22-2012 10:00 PM

Posts: 24,910



Post: #2806
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
Advertisement
Leopardsands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 09:58 PM)
Religion fits inside no nutshell

Unless the universe is in a radioactive nutshell!

EXPLAINING GOD THROUGH REASON
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Easy-Rel...a-Nutshell
[Image: E3D5_4F3F3AB2.gif]
Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement

FreedomStands
Registered User
User ID: 14247
02-22-2012 10:13 PM

Posts: 24,910



Post: #2807
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 09:57 PM)
Quote:we can only make a choice at a time
Yes that is the nature of the rational mind, conscious, but the subconscious is not limited by words because it uses pictures and a picture can present multiple choices at once. Which is why you need to go out of your mind into the subconscious to understand the world of god, that is what i am saying again and again.

Quote:Omnibenevolent means "All Good" or "All Beneficial". This means that something omnibenevolent only does good. The reason I say that the God of the Bible and Qur'an isn't all good, is because it also does things that can be considered harmful, like causing people to die naturally. One could say "all that happens is good" but clearly, there is not all good, nor is harm being entirely prevented or healed.

Healing us would not interfere with our free will, just as sickness can interfere with our free will by leading us to death where we are disabled from making further use of our bodies.
You can not prove that we die because of god or that god causes us harm. The one presented in the bible is not seabaoth it is the bad one proving it however can not be done, you need faith. If we would not die our childeren could never rise and shine as the parent did that is why it is good that we die naturally, to give others a chance at being good. Healing would interferre because if we heal another we have done good which we no longer could do and we would not learn and progres into a human with better understanding. Which is why sickness and other disasters are there but to say that only seabaoth is responsible is something that can not be proven. There is evil and evil, good and good. Some evil is good and some good is evil, it is very hard to distinguish it with our current level of understanding. Would you believe that some disney movies, which most percieve as good for children, actual have a very evil essence !

Quote:I'm not trying to purposefully twist your words or anything, I apologize if I'm making any mistakes with what you are saying.
Do not apologise for we are human and make mistakes, by saying that you make mistakes you do good. Humans, and i am human too, are fallible. Apologis are done eye to eye not screen to screen.

Quote:I don't understand the "tearing itself apart" idea. It would only "tear itself apart" if it was predetermined by something that, "tearing apart" is the result of such and such.

It had nothing before it, nothing predetermined anything for it, it is entirely free and unbounded, so in order to do the "tearing apart" it would have to determine all these factors and stuff. I don't think it can really tear itself apart though, or would have a need to, it can tear anything within itself apart though, like a world or whatever, but that doesn't really influence it, because it is everywhere absolutely, like solid, nothing moves it, everything inside it is information it created from nothing. Any motion of the information inside it is animated by it and sustained by it, but it doesn't move itself.
You say that the ultimate is not void of thought/emotions. With thought/emotions comes conflict between good and bad, happiness and sadness are opposites you can not be both. With thought/emotions comes the such and such. Yet you say that the ultimate is both, good and bad, because both comes from it. Yet when he is good he is not bad and when bad he is not good, these two are opposites and can not exist in the same place at once and that is why it torn it self apart and became void as in nothing like a computer that computes it's algorithems endlessly. Brain dead is what you could call it to and by this i demonstrate, and so do you, that our words can not make a model of it that would fit it for a 100%.

I define evil and good as "harm and benefit". What is "harmful" to us, may be good to another. For example, killing an animal is harmful to the animal but we can then eat it which can be good for us.

The Ultimate is free from needs, so nothing benefits or harms the Ultimate, yet all things that are harmful to us, and all things that are beneficial to us come from it, and all things that are harmful to anything, and all things that are beneficial to anything come from it, and all that is harmful and beneficial no matter what it is, are only "things" and "things" are only information. The idea of "harm" and "benefit" is only from our perspective.

You're probably thinking of some greater or more profound sense of the words "good" and "evil" but I know that those words only mean "benefit" and "harm". What is "good" for us benefits us, and what is evil to us "harms" us.

The sun gives important energy to plants, but can also dry them out and kill them.

I don't think sick people exist just so we can heal them, sometimes we can't, yet God or whatever could, but doesn't, instead allowing them to suffer greatly.

I'm saying it is not void of "thought/emotions" in the sense that all thoughts and emotions that we have, is information which comes from it, and is animated by it.

As for itself, it has a will, meaning that it can decide things and make them happen. A computer program or something braindead can not operate without being powered, nor can it make a decision for itself. The decisions it makes are not based on anything though, because it has "freewill" in the truest form, not depending on anything to make decisions, totally unrestricted, yet for this reality it keeps to some scientific laws it seems, but also has broken them at times, to baffle people with miracles.

EXPLAINING GOD THROUGH REASON
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Easy-Rel...a-Nutshell
[Image: E3D5_4F3F3AB2.gif]
Quote this message in a reply
FreedomStands
Registered User
User ID: 14247
02-22-2012 10:45 PM

Posts: 24,910



Post: #2808
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 10:28 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 10:25 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 10:23 PM)
wouldn't God already know in advance 'every move' we make before we make them ??

Yeah, and better yet, is even what enables you to make those moves in the first place.

but with Jesus, didn't God the father give up his authority to his son ??

meaning the enabled are more important than the enabler....

No, I don't think God gave up authority to Jesus. Jesus was sent by God:

Mark 13:32
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Pater.

Acts 1:7
He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Master has set by his own authority.

(This shows that God has the authority.)

Matthew 24:36
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Pater.

(This shows that Jesus doesn't have full knowledge or control.)

Matthew 4:10
Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.'"

(The word for worship hear means performing the kowtow.)

Mark 12:29
"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.

(The most important commandment is that God is One, and is the only Lord and God.)

John 5:30
I can do nothing on my own. I judge as God tells me. Therefore, my judgment is just, because I carry out the will of the one who sent me, not my own will.

(This shows that Jesus has no authority of his own, but does what he is told to do by the true authority.)

John 6:38
For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.

(This shows that God sent Jesus to people, and Jesus is doing what God wills, not what Jesus wills.)

John 8:28
So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am [the one I claim to be] and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Master has taught me.

(Jesus reveals that only what God tells him to say is what he says as revelation.)

John 12:49
For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Master who sent me commanded me what to say and how to say it.

(The Master/Pater commands Jesus.)

John 12:50
I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Master has told me to say."

(This repeats that God is in command.)

Matthew 26:39
Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will."

(This shows that Jesus worships God and begs God for things, performing the kowtow, which was the traditional method of worship and expression of submission to authority and God.)

EXPLAINING GOD THROUGH REASON
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Easy-Rel...a-Nutshell
[Image: E3D5_4F3F3AB2.gif]
Quote this message in a reply
FreedomStands
Registered User
User ID: 14247
02-22-2012 10:48 PM

Posts: 24,910



Post: #2809
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
Fill yourself with hate, it is healthy!

Being full of powerful anger doesn't mean you have to take harmful actions. You can use the energy to do exercise or other things.

Hate doesn't consume, and isn't dangerous really, it can be used in positive ways. One could say "don't let the positivity consume you" "don't let the love consume you or you'll kill yourself" it is all stupid superstitious thinking.

People should work out for their health, and not in excess so as to hurt themselves.

No, I don't have anger issues or whatever, I am just saying everything can be used constructively, and it isn't to be feared.

Sadness, anger, whatever, these shouldn't be considered taboo, they all have their rightful place and can be used for our benefit.

EXPLAINING GOD THROUGH REASON
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Easy-Rel...a-Nutshell
[Image: E3D5_4F3F3AB2.gif]
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 14792
02-22-2012 10:48 PM

 



Post: #2810
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 10:13 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 09:57 PM)
Quote:we can only make a choice at a time
Yes that is the nature of the rational mind, conscious, but the subconscious is not limited by words because it uses pictures and a picture can present multiple choices at once. Which is why you need to go out of your mind into the subconscious to understand the world of god, that is what i am saying again and again.

Quote:Omnibenevolent means "All Good" or "All Beneficial". This means that something omnibenevolent only does good. The reason I say that the God of the Bible and Qur'an isn't all good, is because it also does things that can be considered harmful, like causing people to die naturally. One could say "all that happens is good" but clearly, there is not all good, nor is harm being entirely prevented or healed.

Healing us would not interfere with our free will, just as sickness can interfere with our free will by leading us to death where we are disabled from making further use of our bodies.
You can not prove that we die because of god or that god causes us harm. The one presented in the bible is not seabaoth it is the bad one proving it however can not be done, you need faith. If we would not die our childeren could never rise and shine as the parent did that is why it is good that we die naturally, to give others a chance at being good. Healing would interferre because if we heal another we have done good which we no longer could do and we would not learn and progres into a human with better understanding. Which is why sickness and other disasters are there but to say that only seabaoth is responsible is something that can not be proven. There is evil and evil, good and good. Some evil is good and some good is evil, it is very hard to distinguish it with our current level of understanding. Would you believe that some disney movies, which most percieve as good for children, actual have a very evil essence !

Quote:I'm not trying to purposefully twist your words or anything, I apologize if I'm making any mistakes with what you are saying.
Do not apologise for we are human and make mistakes, by saying that you make mistakes you do good. Humans, and i am human too, are fallible. Apologis are done eye to eye not screen to screen.

Quote:I don't understand the "tearing itself apart" idea. It would only "tear itself apart" if it was predetermined by something that, "tearing apart" is the result of such and such.

It had nothing before it, nothing predetermined anything for it, it is entirely free and unbounded, so in order to do the "tearing apart" it would have to determine all these factors and stuff. I don't think it can really tear itself apart though, or would have a need to, it can tear anything within itself apart though, like a world or whatever, but that doesn't really influence it, because it is everywhere absolutely, like solid, nothing moves it, everything inside it is information it created from nothing. Any motion of the information inside it is animated by it and sustained by it, but it doesn't move itself.
You say that the ultimate is not void of thought/emotions. With thought/emotions comes conflict between good and bad, happiness and sadness are opposites you can not be both. With thought/emotions comes the such and such. Yet you say that the ultimate is both, good and bad, because both comes from it. Yet when he is good he is not bad and when bad he is not good, these two are opposites and can not exist in the same place at once and that is why it torn it self apart and became void as in nothing like a computer that computes it's algorithems endlessly. Brain dead is what you could call it to and by this i demonstrate, and so do you, that our words can not make a model of it that would fit it for a 100%.

I define evil and good as "harm and benefit". What is "harmful" to us, may be good to another. For example, killing an animal is harmful to the animal but we can then eat it which can be good for us.

The Ultimate is free from needs, so nothing benefits or harms the Ultimate, yet all things that are harmful to us, and all things that are beneficial to us come from it, and all things that are harmful to anything, and all things that are beneficial to anything come from it, and all that is harmful and beneficial no matter what it is, are only "things" and "things" are only information. The idea of "harm" and "benefit" is only from our perspective.

You're probably thinking of some greater or more profound sense of the words "good" and "evil" but I know that those words only mean "benefit" and "harm". What is "good" for us benefits us, and what is evil to us "harms" us.

The sun gives important energy to plants, but can also dry them out and kill them.

I don't think sick people exist just so we can heal them, sometimes we can't, yet God or whatever could, but doesn't, instead allowing them to suffer greatly.

I'm saying it is not void of "thought/emotions" in the sense that all thoughts and emotions that we have, is information which comes from it, and is animated by it.

As for itself, it has a will, meaning that it can decide things and make them happen. A computer program or something braindead can not operate without being powered, nor can it make a decision for itself. The decisions it makes are not based on anything though, because it has "freewill" in the truest form, not depending on anything to make decisions, totally unrestricted, yet for this reality it keeps to some scientific laws it seems, but also has broken them at times, to baffle people with miracles.

Than the information which conflicts tears it apart.

Quote:I don't think sick people exist just so we can heal them, sometimes we can't, yet God or whatever could, but doesn't, instead allowing them to suffer greatly.
That does not debunk what i said about it, this is a sign that you can not believe or comprehend what i have said.

Quote:You're probably thinking of some greater or more profound sense of the words "good" and "evil" but I know that those words only mean "benefit" and "harm". What is "good" for us benefits us, and what is evil to us "harms" us.
That is why we can not distinguish it, you are not really debunking what i said. It's a sigh that again you do not believe or can not comprehend what i said.

Have you ever seen star trek next generation: Where Silence Has Lease
That is a nice episode of nothing that does something while it is nothing or perhaps you have seen it, well i would not bow to that being. It's totally ignorant, we are not totally ignorant just partial.
http://watchseries.eu/episode/star_trek:...56812.html
One of the links or more works, i am looking at the whole series one by one as i talk with you.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 14792
02-22-2012 11:05 PM

 



Post: #2811
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 10:48 PM)
Fill yourself with hate, it is healthy!

Being full of powerful anger doesn't mean you have to take harmful actions. You can use the energy to do exercise or other things.

Hate doesn't consume, and isn't dangerous really, it can be used in positive ways. One could say "don't let the positivity consume you" "don't let the love consume you or you'll kill yourself" it is all stupid superstitious thinking.

People should work out for their health, and not in excess so as to hurt themselves.

No, I don't have anger issues or whatever, I am just saying everything can be used constructively, and it isn't to be feared.

Sadness, anger, whatever, these shouldn't be considered taboo, they all have their rightful place and can be used for our benefit.

Now i know for sure that there is something very wrong with you. For i have been there.

All these emotions blinds you for the truth. Psychology perfectly demonstrates the opposite of what you said and makes me think you stand above these emotions which you can not. A mistake i made many years ago and i am glad to be out of it for my life has become so much better when i dropped being hatefull and i gained so much more understanding when i stopped being sad.

Everything falls into place about you now, your forgetfulness as an example, that i know you can cultivate hate, sadness, and other blinding emotions. Because of this you are full of yourself and fighting the self. This the only way one can keep that fight up but mark my words in end you lose yourself, this is know as dementia.
Quote this message in a reply
FreedomStands
Registered User
User ID: 14247
02-22-2012 11:10 PM

Posts: 24,910



Post: #2812
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 10:48 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 10:13 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 09:57 PM)
Yes that is the nature of the rational mind, conscious, but the subconscious is not limited by words because it uses pictures and a picture can present multiple choices at once. Which is why you need to go out of your mind into the subconscious to understand the world of god, that is what i am saying again and again.

You can not prove that we die because of god or that god causes us harm. The one presented in the bible is not seabaoth it is the bad one proving it however can not be done, you need faith. If we would not die our childeren could never rise and shine as the parent did that is why it is good that we die naturally, to give others a chance at being good. Healing would interferre because if we heal another we have done good which we no longer could do and we would not learn and progres into a human with better understanding. Which is why sickness and other disasters are there but to say that only seabaoth is responsible is something that can not be proven. There is evil and evil, good and good. Some evil is good and some good is evil, it is very hard to distinguish it with our current level of understanding. Would you believe that some disney movies, which most percieve as good for children, actual have a very evil essence !

Do not apologise for we are human and make mistakes, by saying that you make mistakes you do good. Humans, and i am human too, are fallible. Apologis are done eye to eye not screen to screen.

You say that the ultimate is not void of thought/emotions. With thought/emotions comes conflict between good and bad, happiness and sadness are opposites you can not be both. With thought/emotions comes the such and such. Yet you say that the ultimate is both, good and bad, because both comes from it. Yet when he is good he is not bad and when bad he is not good, these two are opposites and can not exist in the same place at once and that is why it torn it self apart and became void as in nothing like a computer that computes it's algorithems endlessly. Brain dead is what you could call it to and by this i demonstrate, and so do you, that our words can not make a model of it that would fit it for a 100%.

I define evil and good as "harm and benefit". What is "harmful" to us, may be good to another. For example, killing an animal is harmful to the animal but we can then eat it which can be good for us.

The Ultimate is free from needs, so nothing benefits or harms the Ultimate, yet all things that are harmful to us, and all things that are beneficial to us come from it, and all things that are harmful to anything, and all things that are beneficial to anything come from it, and all that is harmful and beneficial no matter what it is, are only "things" and "things" are only information. The idea of "harm" and "benefit" is only from our perspective.

You're probably thinking of some greater or more profound sense of the words "good" and "evil" but I know that those words only mean "benefit" and "harm". What is "good" for us benefits us, and what is evil to us "harms" us.

The sun gives important energy to plants, but can also dry them out and kill them.

I don't think sick people exist just so we can heal them, sometimes we can't, yet God or whatever could, but doesn't, instead allowing them to suffer greatly.

I'm saying it is not void of "thought/emotions" in the sense that all thoughts and emotions that we have, is information which comes from it, and is animated by it.

As for itself, it has a will, meaning that it can decide things and make them happen. A computer program or something braindead can not operate without being powered, nor can it make a decision for itself. The decisions it makes are not based on anything though, because it has "freewill" in the truest form, not depending on anything to make decisions, totally unrestricted, yet for this reality it keeps to some scientific laws it seems, but also has broken them at times, to baffle people with miracles.

Than the information which conflicts tears it apart.

Quote:I don't think sick people exist just so we can heal them, sometimes we can't, yet God or whatever could, but doesn't, instead allowing them to suffer greatly.
That does not debunk what i said about it, this is a sign that you can not believe or comprehend what i have said.

Quote:You're probably thinking of some greater or more profound sense of the words "good" and "evil" but I know that those words only mean "benefit" and "harm". What is "good" for us benefits us, and what is evil to us "harms" us.
That is why we can not distinguish it, you are not really debunking what i said. It's a sigh that again you do not believe or can not comprehend what i said.

Have you ever seen star trek next generation: Where Silence Has Lease
That is a nice episode of nothing that does something while it is nothing or perhaps you have seen it, well i would not bow to that being. It's totally ignorant, we are not totally ignorant just partial.
http://watchseries.eu/episode/star_trek:...56812.html
One of the links or more works, i am looking at the whole series one by one as i talk with you.

Using normal language, something that is truly nothing can't do anything because it doesn't exist nor is able to do anything.

information wouldn't tear anything apart unless it was determined by something greater and before it that it should tear apart when facing such information.

The rules for anything to happen have to be set for the thing to happen.

There were no rules before God, nor is God under any rules (I mean the Ultimate when I say God), nor was information existing before God, God created the information, manifested it, that is God's unique ability.

EXPLAINING GOD THROUGH REASON
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Easy-Rel...a-Nutshell
[Image: E3D5_4F3F3AB2.gif]
Quote this message in a reply
FreedomStands
Registered User
User ID: 14247
02-22-2012 11:12 PM

Posts: 24,910



Post: #2813
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:05 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 10:48 PM)
Fill yourself with hate, it is healthy!

Being full of powerful anger doesn't mean you have to take harmful actions. You can use the energy to do exercise or other things.

Hate doesn't consume, and isn't dangerous really, it can be used in positive ways. One could say "don't let the positivity consume you" "don't let the love consume you or you'll kill yourself" it is all stupid superstitious thinking.

People should work out for their health, and not in excess so as to hurt themselves.

No, I don't have anger issues or whatever, I am just saying everything can be used constructively, and it isn't to be feared.

Sadness, anger, whatever, these shouldn't be considered taboo, they all have their rightful place and can be used for our benefit.

Now i know for sure that there is something very wrong with you. For i have been there.

All these emotions blinds you for the truth. Psychology perfectly demonstrates the opposite of what you said and makes me think you stand above these emotions which you can not. A mistake i made many years ago and i am glad to be out of it for my life has become so much better when i dropped being hatefull and i gained so much more understanding when i stopped being sad.

Everything falls into place about you now, your forgetfulness as an example, that i know you can cultivate hate, sadness, and other blinding emotions. Because of this you are full of yourself and fighting the self. This the only way one can keep that fight up but mark my words in end you lose yourself, this is know as dementia.

Well, I wrote that to someone who was telling another user that the hate will "consume them" and I find these to be superstitious and ridiculous fears.

Anger, and hate, can't do anything by themselves, it is how a person acts on such things that can be destructive or harmful. If a person uses the same energy to benefit themselves, then it can be used in a good way too.

One shouldn't fill themselves with hate or anything like that, if they are too foolish to understand that they shouldn't act on emotions in a harmful way, but use all energy for their own benefit or not act on it at all.

Each and every emotion has its place as a defense mechanism and can be used in constructive ways. Psychology does not disagree with what I'm saying, but the ridiculous anti-negativity New Ager types would.

They fear their own thoughts, they fear "negative thinking", and they think such things can bring harm and disease and things, and these are just superstitious fantasies.

I'm telling them it can bring health too, and if they believe their beliefs are what count, then they should believe it can be used in a good way, because believing otherwise is not helpful.

EXPLAINING GOD THROUGH REASON
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Easy-Rel...a-Nutshell
[Image: E3D5_4F3F3AB2.gif]
(This post was last modified: 02-22-2012 11:14 PM by FreedomStands.) Quote this message in a reply
FreedomStands
Registered User
User ID: 14247
02-22-2012 11:26 PM

Posts: 24,910



Post: #2814
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:21 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:16 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:08 PM)
it can change, be constantly changing -- God can change and be constantly changing

otherwise God would be dead, 'over with'

The information within God, that God produced, is constantly changing, but God itself is infinite and does not spacially expand because an infinite encompasses all space, there is nothing outside of it.

so there is nothing to be concerned with then, as God has it all under-control....humans are meaningless and irrelevant

God, and God alone bears all the responsibility for 'everything'

God is evil, God is good

That is right, but that doesn't mean jumping to the conclusion that there is no way for us to at least attempt on the immediate level what seems to be an effort to gain benefit and avoid harm. Our only purpose can be to try to survive, and survive beneficially if possible. Yes, on the Ultimate level, it may be that God is what determined the results we ended up choosing, but on the immediate level we should still try if we can try or seem to try to make an effort to benefit ourselves and avoid harm, and to get benefit later as well, after our deaths, in case there is to be more.

LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:10 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:07 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:05 PM)
under such a supposition, God wouldn't be a creator, as a creator can not exist with creation

Huh? I don't know what that means or how you come to that conclusion. Everything is within God, nothing is without God.



Though, if there was nothing at all, there would still be God


so are you meaning God created God ?? God is God's creation ??

No? I was just saying the rocks, and matter, and whatever else, isn't God, nor does God need those things to be God, but God is what existed first, and always existed and was not created or produced, everything else is information within it which it produced. It is the eternal infinite which encompasses everything, but even if there were not those things, it would still exist, it doesn't need those things to be "God" is what I was saying.

The Evil AC  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:18 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:16 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:08 PM)
it can change, be constantly changing -- God can change and be constantly changing

otherwise God would be dead, 'over with'

The information within God, that God produced, is constantly changing, but God itself is infinite and does not spacially expand because an infinite encompasses all space, there is nothing outside of it.

That is a contradiction. You have stated many times it is impossible for nothing to exist.
How much money are you making off the Internet and long threads?

Probably as much as you are making for hiding to make posts to me and accuse me of things, which I think is zero dollars.

I only have 1 thread. I am not making any money from what I talk about or post or the length or anything.

"there is nothing outside of it" means "nothing exists outside of it" it isn't a contradiction. There isn't anything outside of it is what I'm saying, yes, nothing doesn't exist, only what I call God exists.

LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:27 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:18 PM)
but God is what existed first,

that is basically your personal credo isn't....

'first' above all else....

seriously, is that a moral foundation for what is good ??

to me "good" and "evil" just mean "harm" and "benefit".

For God, nothing can "harm" or "benefit" God.

For us, things can "harm" and "benefit" us.

All experiences are information, and this includes experiences of "harm" and experiences of "benefit".

All information is produced by God, sustained by God, and animated by what I call God.

My advice is to seek the benefit, and avoid the harm, even if you're being controlled ultimately, to try your best on the immediate level to seek the benefit and avoid the harm.

LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:41 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:35 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:27 PM)
that is basically your personal credo isn't....

'first' above all else....

seriously, is that a moral foundation for what is good ??

to me "good" and "evil" just mean "harm" and "benefit".

For God, nothing can "harm" or "benefit" God.

For us, things can "harm" and "benefit" us.

All experiences are information, and this includes experiences of "harm" and experiences of "benefit".

All information is produced by God, sustained by God, and animated by what I call God.

My advice is to seek the benefit, and avoid the harm, even if you're being controlled ultimately, to try your best on the immediate level to seek the benefit and avoid the harm.

so John 3:16 basically means: "God so loved himself that he sent his only son to die in his place, as God is much more important than his meaningless children"


anyways -- i do got to go before she strangles me -- i leave the final word to you in this discussion, i will read it later....thanks Heartflowers

Uh? I think John 3:16 means God cared about the world, so sent Jesus to teach the way to achieve eternal paradise, rather than leave them in ignorance. Why the heck would God have to die for anything to happen?

Later it says:

John 3:19
This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

It is talking about how Jesus taught the good news, and the way to paradise.

When it says to believe in Jesus, that doesn't mean worship Jesus, that means to believe in what Jesus teaches, to follow what Jesus says.

Jesus said to worship God, to follow the commandments of God, to do good, to fast, help people, be humble and avoid sin to the point of cutting off your own body parts because Gehenna is a terrible place.

Believing in Jesus is not treating Jesus a God, because Jesus prayed to God, and clearly distinguished himself by showing that he didn't know what God knows. Jesus told people to worship God, and Jesus did it himself.

The Lucky AC  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:47 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:41 PM)
The Lucky AC  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:37 PM)
What reward is possible?
In your thread you have said that you believe when we die it is the end and there is nothing for us beyond that point.

I'm pretty sure I said more than that, multiple times.

Even in the third link on the first post I talk about death, and in the fourth link I think I do too.

No, I don't think it is definitely the end. I don't think one experiences anything when they are dead, just like we didn't experience anything we know of before we were alive.

So there could be a huge span of time, but you wouldn't know it, until you wake up again.

Waking up again is the whole issue, and it is that possibility one has to prepare for by putting up a defense of good deeds if one is going to be called to account for their actions during life as the ancients have claimed.
Then how can one receive a reward?

If you are woken up, made to live again, the time you've been dead will seem like just a short nap, just like a dreamless sleep. Then you'll be alive again to receive a reward or punishment for your conduct, if there is such a thing. If there is such a thing, then one should prepare at least, by putting forth good, rather than harm, so that one doesn't receive terrible results. Good is stuff like helping people, giving charity, making them happy, worship and appreciation of God for your own sake and to remind yourself of your position in life and all that.

The Lucky AC  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:40 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:35 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:27 PM)
that is basically your personal credo isn't....

'first' above all else....

seriously, is that a moral foundation for what is good ??

to me "good" and "evil" just mean "harm" and "benefit".

For God, nothing can "harm" or "benefit" God.

For us, things can "harm" and "benefit" us.

All experiences are information, and this includes experiences of "harm" and experiences of "benefit".

All information is produced by God, sustained by God, and animated by what I call God.

My advice is to seek the benefit, and avoid the harm, even if you're being controlled ultimately, to try your best on the immediate level to seek the benefit and avoid the harm.

If we are being controlled ultimately then everything ceases to have a point and meaning. Are you saying God and reality is pointless?

God doesn't need a "point" to do anything. It does whatever it wills. Reality also doesn't need a "point", but God can determine a "point" or more important we can determine a "point", the best of which is to try to achieve benefit rather than harm. That should always be the "point" for us.

The Lucky AC  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:55 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:52 PM)
The Lucky AC  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:47 PM)
Then how can one receive a reward?

If you are woken up, made to live again, the time you've been dead will seem like just a short nap, just like a dreamless sleep. Then you'll be alive again to receive a reward or punishment for your conduct, if there is such a thing. If there is such a thing, then one should prepare at least, by putting forth good, rather than harm, so that one doesn't receive terrible results. Good is stuff like helping people, giving charity, making them happy, worship and appreciation of God for your own sake and to remind yourself of your position in life and all that.

I am unsatisfied with your answer.
By what standards [and where do they come from] should we be rewarded or punished?

The standards that God creates. How do we know which are from God or if any known are from God?

Well if none are known from God, it can't be helped.

Luckily, most cultures and religions across the whole world since ancient times generally agree on the same standards:

Mainly that Good is benefit to yourself and others especially, such as helping the poor and those in need, and bad is harming the innocent and yourself.

There are many other things the world agrees on, and it is what my thread is about.

EXPLAINING GOD THROUGH REASON
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Easy-Rel...a-Nutshell
[Image: E3D5_4F3F3AB2.gif]
(This post was last modified: 02-23-2012 12:04 AM by FreedomStands.) Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 14792
02-22-2012 11:37 PM

 



Post: #2815
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
Quote:Anger, and hate, can't do anything by themselves, it is how a person acts on such things that can be destructive or harmful. If a person uses the same energy to benefit themselves, then it can be used in a good way too.

On the contrary anger and hate compels one to act, if the person uses the energy to benefit themselves they are selfish which is harmfull for those around you if not it is no longer anger or hate energy that is used. It is changed into compasion or peace energy.

Quote:One shouldn't fill themselves with hate or anything like that, if they are too foolish to understand that they shouldn't act on emotions in a harmful way, but use all energy for their own benefit or not act on it at all.
Anger and hate alway's fills a person, you are foolish to not understand that.

Quote:Each and every emotion has its place as a defense mechanism and can be used in constructive ways. Psychology does not disagree with what I'm saying, but the ridiculous anti-negativity New Ager types would.
Psychology say's that the negative emotions blocks a persons sane insight, henche it fills them. Why else would a person become an alcohol addict after a death of a friend or other loss like work. They simply see no way out because they are filled with the negative emotion. The block i mentioned.

Quote:They fear their own thoughts, they fear "negative thinking", and they think such things can bring harm and disease and things, and these are just superstitious fantasies.
They do not fear, they know it brings harm just like i do. I have personal experience about it. My mind was closed to all the truth that people presented, i thought i knew better tho i was very wrong.

Quote:I'm telling them it can bring health too, and if they believe their beliefs are what count, then they should believe it can be used in a good way, because believing otherwise is not helpful.
That is only apparent in the selfish way for all around you are not helped. That is why you are not debunking what i say rather you throw away what i say and put your own reasoning right on top of it as if i never said a thing.


Question: do you hear voices that are on the same level of sound as your own thinking voice ?
Quote this message in a reply
FreedomStands
Registered User
User ID: 14247
02-22-2012 11:57 PM

Posts: 24,910



Post: #2816
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:37 PM)
Quote:Anger, and hate, can't do anything by themselves, it is how a person acts on such things that can be destructive or harmful. If a person uses the same energy to benefit themselves, then it can be used in a good way too.

On the contrary anger and hate compels one to act, if the person uses the energy to benefit themselves they are selfish which is harmfull for those around you if not it is no longer anger or hate energy that is used. It is changed into compasion or peace energy.

Quote:One shouldn't fill themselves with hate or anything like that, if they are too foolish to understand that they shouldn't act on emotions in a harmful way, but use all energy for their own benefit or not act on it at all.
Anger and hate alway's fills a person, you are foolish to not understand that.

Quote:Each and every emotion has its place as a defense mechanism and can be used in constructive ways. Psychology does not disagree with what I'm saying, but the ridiculous anti-negativity New Ager types would.
Psychology say's that the negative emotions blocks a persons sane insight, henche it fills them. Why else would a person become an alcohol addict after a death of a friend or other loss like work. They simply see no way out because they are filled with the negative emotion. The block i mentioned.

Quote:They fear their own thoughts, they fear "negative thinking", and they think such things can bring harm and disease and things, and these are just superstitious fantasies.
They do not fear, they know it brings harm just like i do. I have personal experience about it. My mind was closed to all the truth that people presented, i thought i knew better tho i was very wrong.

Quote:I'm telling them it can bring health too, and if they believe their beliefs are what count, then they should believe it can be used in a good way, because believing otherwise is not helpful.
That is only apparent in the selfish way for all around you are not helped. That is why you are not debunking what i say rather you throw away what i say and put your own reasoning right on top of it as if i never said a thing.


Question: do you hear voices that are on the same level of sound as your own thinking voice ?

hmm no, I don't think I hear voices other than my own.

I think it is a waste of useful energy to not use anger when it comes to benefit yourself. There is nothing wrong in being "selfish" in some senses. You must eat food, that can be called "selfish" too. Similarly, using negative energy when it comes, in a constructive way, is much better than just wasting it, or acting badly on it, or being afraid of it and thinking it will harm you, or trying to repress it due to fear of it. People then become more anxious because they fear their own emotions and reactions. I'm teaching a method of self control and effective use.

EXPLAINING GOD THROUGH REASON
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Easy-Rel...a-Nutshell
[Image: E3D5_4F3F3AB2.gif]
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 14792
02-23-2012 12:51 AM

 



Post: #2817
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
Quote:hmm no, I don't think I hear voices other than my own.

I think it is a waste of useful energy to not use anger when it comes to benefit yourself. There is nothing wrong in being "selfish" in some senses. You must eat food, that can be called "selfish" too. Similarly, using negative energy when it comes, in a constructive way, is much better than just wasting it, or acting badly on it, or being afraid of it and thinking it will harm you, or trying to repress it due to fear of it. People then become more anxious because they fear their own emotions and reactions. I'm teaching a method of self control and effective use.

You do not think you do well that sounds inconclusive.

Eating is only selfish if you do not share. Eating when hungry can not be called selfish then, it is a need.
A few pages ago i said "i hate it when emotions get the better of me". At point i recoginzed my anger and turned it into compassion so i answerd to your reply's, still do. Anger that caused me to shut you off and no longer able to help you, that is the harm. Tho you would reply that you won't need help well take it from me you do need it. You are just blind to the fact that you act with out compassion, you are empty as in void. So you selfreflected your model which means the model you presented is based on you and not the ultimate.

Selfcontrol in the true way is being able to handle emotions, not to supress them and not to use them but to recognize them, so one can make just assumptions by which everyone is helped. Fear is another emotion to be controlled like that.

You turned to scientology, Jptdknpa. They teach the same method of self control and effective use, look at what has become of them, at how they live their lives, and at what those who left the organisation have to say about it. It fit's the whole picture why you say the void is not nothing but something for they see themselves as the spirtiual center when they meditate. It is why you are so arrogant and submissive when you want.

I have to give you credit for the fact you where able to hide that from me.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 67922
02-23-2012 09:48 AM

 



Post: #2818
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:26 PM)
Uh? I think John 3:16 means God cared about the world, so sent Jesus to teach the way to achieve eternal paradise, rather than leave them in ignorance. Why the heck would God have to die for anything to happen?

so you don't believe that Jesus had to die for our sins, as is commonly preached in Christianity ??
Quote this message in a reply
FreedomStands
Registered User
User ID: 14247
02-23-2012 09:55 AM

Posts: 24,910



Post: #2819
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-23-2012 12:51 AM)
Quote:hmm no, I don't think I hear voices other than my own.

I think it is a waste of useful energy to not use anger when it comes to benefit yourself. There is nothing wrong in being "selfish" in some senses. You must eat food, that can be called "selfish" too. Similarly, using negative energy when it comes, in a constructive way, is much better than just wasting it, or acting badly on it, or being afraid of it and thinking it will harm you, or trying to repress it due to fear of it. People then become more anxious because they fear their own emotions and reactions. I'm teaching a method of self control and effective use.

You do not think you do well that sounds inconclusive.

Eating is only selfish if you do not share. Eating when hungry can not be called selfish then, it is a need.
A few pages ago i said "i hate it when emotions get the better of me". At point i recoginzed my anger and turned it into compassion so i answerd to your reply's, still do. Anger that caused me to shut you off and no longer able to help you, that is the harm. Tho you would reply that you won't need help well take it from me you do need it. You are just blind to the fact that you act with out compassion, you are empty as in void. So you selfreflected your model which means the model you presented is based on you and not the ultimate.

Selfcontrol in the true way is being able to handle emotions, not to supress them and not to use them but to recognize them, so one can make just assumptions by which everyone is helped. Fear is another emotion to be controlled like that.

You turned to scientology, Jptdknpa. They teach the same method of self control and effective use, look at what has become of them, at how they live their lives, and at what those who left the organisation have to say about it. It fit's the whole picture why you say the void is not nothing but something for they see themselves as the spirtiual center when they meditate. It is why you are so arrogant and submissive when you want.

I have to give you credit for the fact you where able to hide that from me.

I'm not really sure what you're talking about. How can you say that I have no compassion? What makes you think that?

I don't see myself as the spiritual center or whatever.

All I was saying is anger can be used to help oneself in becoming more physically fit and healthy. I agree one should be aware of how they feel.

I never said I don't need help, I've asked you to help me understand your ideas as best you can.

I'll tell you why I don't agree with this word "void":

void (adj.)
late 13c., "unoccupied, vacant," from Anglo-Fr. and O.Fr. voide "empty, vast, wide, hollow, waste," from L. vocivus "unoccupied, vacant," related to vacuus "empty" (see vacuum).

Not only is it not "empty" because everything that exists now is within it, but if nothing existed, it would not be an "empty space" because even space is made of information, dimensions, systems, laws, and that would be made by it in order to exist. The Ultimate is the producer of all that:

_______

ultimate
1650s, from L.L. ultimatus, pp. of ultimare "to be final, come to an end," from ultimus "last, final," superlative of *ulter "beyond" (see ultra-).

______

I use the term Ultimate because it is the final and utmost level that encompasses all the other levels within it.

utmost
O.E. utmest (Anglian) "outermost," double superlative of ut "out" (see out) + -most.

maximum
1740, from L. maximum, neut. of maximus "greatest," superl. of magnus "great, large" (see magnum).

_________

infinite (adj.)
late 14c., "eternal, limitless," from O.Fr. infinit "endless, boundless," and directly from L. infinitus "unbounded, unlimited," from in- "not, opposite of" (see in- (1)) + finitus "defining, definite," from finis "end" (see finish). The noun meaning "that which is infinite" is from 1580s.

_________

Everything within The Infinite, is finite, and there can only be One Infinite.

Everything Lesser than the Ultimate, is less than the Ultimate.

I'm not just saying these things, this is the nature of language, these words I'm using have meaning.

If there were no objects:

object (n.)
late 14c., "tangible thing, something perceived or presented to the senses,"

and no void, which is an empty space (and space is a created thing).

There would just be the first:

first (adj., adv.)
O.E. fyrst "foremost," superlative of fore; from P.Gmc. *furisto- (cf. O.S. fuirst "first," O.H.G. furist, O.N. fyrstr, Dan. første, O.Fris. ferist, M.Du. vorste "prince," Du. vorst "first," Ger. Fürst "prince"), superlative of *fur-/*for-, from PIE *per- (cf. Skt. pura "before, formerly;" see pro-).

__________

That exists eternally:

eternal (adj.)
late 14c., from O.Fr. eternel or directly from L.L. aeternalis, from L. aeternus "of an age, lasting, enduring, permanent, endless,"

_________

If there was no such thing, there would still be only nothing:

nothing
O.E. naþing, from nan "not one"

nothingness
"nonexistence," 1630s, from nothing + -ness.

_________

All the words I use, I use because they have meanings which relate to what I am saying.

A void is an empty space, that is the meaning of the word. Space has dimensions, and dimensions have to be produced in order to exist, space is information, and God is not made of information but is what produces information from itself:

information
late 14c., "act of informing," from O.Fr. informacion, enformacion "information, advice, instruction," from L. informationem (nom. informatio) "outline, concept, idea," noun of action from pp. stem of informare (see inform). Meaning "knowledge communicated" is from mid-15c.

and things are made of information:

thing
O.E. þing "meeting, assembly," later "entity, being, matter" (subject of deliberation in an assembly), also "act, deed, event, material object, body, being," from P.Gmc. *thengan "appointed time"

______

God is unique:

unique
c.1600, "single, solitary," from Fr. unique, from L. unicus "single, sole," from unus "one" (see one). Meaning "forming the only one of its kind" is attested from 1610s; erroneous sense of "remarkable, uncommon" is attested from mid-19c.

and is not a "thing" which is an event bound with time, an object made of information.

There is no time that God is bound to, time only exists within this reality that exists encompassed within God:

reality
1540s, originally a legal term in the sense of "fixed property," from M.L. realitatem (nom. realitas), from L.L. realis; meaning "real existence" is from 1640s.

encompass
1550s, from en- (1) "make, put in" + compass. Related: Encompassed; encompasses; encompassing.

time (n.)
O.E. tima "limited space of time," from P.Gmc. *timon "time" (cf. O.N. timi "time, proper time," Swed. timme "an hour"), from PIE *di-mon-, from base *da- "cut up, divide" (see tide). In English, a single word encompasses time as "extent" and "point" ...

within
O.E. wiðinnan, lit. "against the inside," see with + in.
________

The Ultimate is the first, everything that comes after it depends on it and is lesser than it, and is governed by the rules made by it. For example, the "second" thing created in this reality can not produce on its own, but is ruled by whatever it can possibly do according to the rules set by the first, and that includes whatever rules the second can possibly make even. So it all goes back to the first, who rules them all, who set all the possible rules for each after, that is why the Ultimate is the Ultimate Ruler of them all.

_________

animation
1590s, "action of imparting life," from L. animationem (nom. animatio) "an animating," noun of action from pp. stem of animare (see animate). Meaning "vitality" is from 1610s. Cinematographic sense is from 1912.

It is not "dead" because it produced by "will":

will (v.)
O.E. *willan, wyllan "to wish, desire, want" varanam "choosing;" Avestan verenav- "to wish, will, choose;"

This is a unique ability, nothing dictates to it what it can possibly will, it wills freely depending on nothing.

Everything that comes after it, even if you call it a "domino" is under the rules it creates for what can possibly happen, and the second is under its rules, and the third is under its rules, because it is the first and set what the second can possibly do, and what the second can possibly do set what the third can possibly do, but all of them are set by what the first has allowed as possible.

I'm using normal language.

It is sustaining all realities:

sustain
late 13c., from O.Fr. sustenir "hold up, endure," from L. sustinere "hold up, support, endure," from sub "up from below" + tenere "to hold" (see tenet).

producer
1510s, "one who produces;"

from L. producere "lead or bring forth, draw out," from pro- "forth" (see pro-) + ducere "to bring, lead" (see duke). Sense of "bring into being" is first recorded 1510s;

Everything I say is sound based on language. I have not tried to lie at all. That means I'm trying to only say the truth.

If you look carefully at the things I say and the words I've used, I am only stating what has to be true.

I don't talk much on matters that require blind faith or don't have to be true.

I'm not saying Jesus died for our sins or whatever, because that not only doesn't make sense, but that doesn't have to be true linguistically either, it is unknown, it can't be verified.

Everything I'm saying is true though:

1. There is and never was no such thing as "nothing" and you can go look up at what the word means.

2. There was always at least the eternal first. You can go look up what that means above.

3. In order for anything to exist, the eternal first had to produce it. You can go look above what produce means.

4. We know for certain that "information" and "things" exist, just look around, those are "things" and they are essentially "information".

5. All that exists is being "sustained". Go look above what sustained means.

6. All that exists is being "animated". It appears in motion, it is not static or still:

kinesis
"physical movement," 1819, from Gk. kinesis "movement, motion" (see cite).

static (adj.)
from Mod.L. statica, from Gk. statikos "causing to stand..."

still (adj.)
O.E. stille "motionless, stationary," from W.Gmc. *steljaz (cf. O.Fris., M.L.G., M.Du. stille, Du. stil, O.H.G. stilli, Ger. still), from root *stel- "fixed, not moving, standing" (see stall (1)). Meaning "quiet, silent" emerged in later O.E.;...from notion of "without change or cessation" (late 13c.);"
________

Everything I'm saying is totally true, both linguistically, and logically. It is not mind boggling science I'm talking about, it is very simple, most people could probably understand by understanding the meaning of words.

EXPLAINING GOD THROUGH REASON
http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Easy-Rel...a-Nutshell
[Image: E3D5_4F3F3AB2.gif]
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 67922
02-23-2012 09:59 AM

 



Post: #2820
RE: Easy Religion in a Nutshell
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:18 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:10 PM)
FreedomStands  Wrote: (02-22-2012 11:07 PM)
Huh? I don't know what that means or how you come to that conclusion. Everything is within God, nothing is without God.



Though, if there was nothing at all, there would still be God


so are you meaning God created God ?? God is God's creation ??

No? I was just saying the rocks, and matter, and whatever else, isn't God, nor does God need those things to be God, but God is what existed first, and always existed and was not created or produced, everything else is information within it which it produced. It is the eternal infinite which encompasses everything, but even if there were not those things, it would still exist, it doesn't need those things to be "God" is what I was saying.

explain why "but God is what existed first" is important to you....
Quote this message in a reply












Contact UsConspiracy Forum. No reg. required! Return to TopReturn to ContentRSS Syndication

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS 2.1