quote:

ORIGINAL: wulfenstraat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Here stands wulf, the antithesis of BenevolentM.

That's fine with me but this is not a very good kickoff for destroying people's faith. This does not make anyone think of what they were told when they were a kid. This does not cut down the bonds of conformism. This does not even kill the tide of tithe.

First of all it is new testament, which leaves many out of it. Many who we think are Christians. You either accept the new testament or you dont't and if you do, you must accept the old testament. This is the first point to break down.

If you accept the old testament you accept the old Jewish laws and all that which were nothing less than tribal in nature. You must, or you cannot believe "in" the reason for "His" crucifixion. In fact His coming was foretold in that "rejected" old tesament. Which is it, was it wrong or right ?

Now that we have that established that you cannot accept the new testament without the old, let's have some time devoted to the old. Just take two quotes, the first : "Thou shall have no other Gods before me". The second is "None come to the Father but by me".

And to accept God, you must accept the Devil. You must have a choice because if you didn't there would be no point to corporeal life. The whole thing is about saving one's self for the afterlife, and even that is unsure. But without an opposing influence, there is nothing. Without black, white paper means nothing. Without the black ink, what is a piece of paper ? It is blank.

So now you have to accept both. Not completely but to be on guard for your immortal soul you must be vigilant. Vigilant against a side of that which you worship. Know thine enemies.

I know how to destroy one's faith. Put me in a room......

But I choose not to because of one logical fact. Although I don't beleive any of it, and reject it totally except for the fact there is some wisdom in those books, I think it is wrong for me to do this because I cannot be sure they are wrong.

That is part of my morality. But the fact is I don't think you could convince someone that the sky is not blue. (you know it isn't)

T^T

Oh, my God, There are people in Gomorrah who are thinking. Take Sodom. But, reconsider Gomorrah. So saith Abraham. So saith Wulfenstraat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Nice return Herr Straat. But shall we go on ? I seek not to destroy faith but to open minds, but sometimes as it has been said, to make a omelette you have to break a few eggs.

Your examples are totally confined to the box. Want to think outside the box ?

WARNING, anyone reading who is religios should stop right now.

God is omnipotent, which means everywhere at everytime in the past or future. The universe is so. Define for me the difference between the universe and god. As much as Men wrote in the past, it is just as likely that what I just wrote is the real truth. I have not embellished it though. God is the universe and we are all a part. Our puny galaxies and star systems are nothing more than cells in it's body. Therefore we are a part of it.

The sixth through tenth books of Moses were deleted from the Bible because they contain the secrets of magic. Magic is nothing but science that is not yet understood. And the true definition of the occult is "that which is hidden". There are more things in heaven and on earth than will ever be understood. Magic and PK and all that, if it truly does exist is not supernatural, for there is nothing supernatural. It is all natural. If it is in the universe it is natural, and that is that. I don't believe all the fairy tale bullshit, but the reality is that we wil never know everything and as humans most will see something as a "sign".

Within their own mind they will extrapolate their own conclusions, form their opinions and sometimes write about it. This has been going on for thousands of years at least. What they saw or envisioned about what they did not understand was melded with their own perspective of the world. Of the most perceptive I believe was John. He envisioned the end of "the world" quite acurately, but as much so metaphorically. Based on his times and reason he professed his knowledge, but it seems so cryptic now.

He had read the works of others, he knew what was going on in his time. It was expressed in his terms. The end of the world. But the end of the world for whom ? The Jews ? I think not, but I could be wrong, and so could he. For Gentiles ? Possibly if he foresaw certain things that even we can't forsee. His portent for the future could not be set in the future because he could not forsee the specifics. Many have equated those writings to what is happening today and some of them take it as gospel so to speak. They think some thing is going to fly up out the ocean and start eating cars, bars and guitars. What people do not see is his lack of experience in the future. Even if he had a true vision of the future, how would he see it ? More importantly how would he express it ? He was imprisoned when he wrote you know (?) By the time he got out he didn't even know what the new chariots looked like.

What I am trying to say is that you can't take this shit to heart. I couldn't even at five years old. After an encounter with Baptists I never wanted to hear about it again. I have to INTEND to do good ? Bullshit, the proof is in the action. And I completely reject the idea that the guy who ripped me off for alot of money could be forgiven by someone who left this earth over two thousand years ago. No leader of mine could ever propose that because if he did, he would not be my leader.

I have no leader. I never have and never will.

T^T

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Don't call people liars.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wulfenstraat

Where are all the other entries I wrote. This site is selectively providing you with what the establishment wants.

quote:

ORIGINAL: outhere69

Damn.  I'm always late to the circus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wulfenstraat

Where are all the other entries I wrote. This site is selectively providing you with what the establishment wants.