Athiests require God to not exist to accommodate their immoralities. Without God, they have a free conscience - nothing is off the table with respect to immoralities. They require a law-free world with no after life and zero repercussions for their actions.
..and they will go to any length to "disprove" God…including wacky "infinite universes" theories.
>Is forcing your personal beliefs on others something God wants you to do?
It's only forced if you read it and are triggered by it. Otherwise, you can just scroll past it, anon.
Thanks
>Buddhism
Buddhism relies on the intervention of higher-beings - supernatural powers. Gods. Thanks
>Nice try. Buddhism "relies" on no such things.
although there are supernatural figures who can help or hinder people on the path towards enlightenment
>How would you know one way or the other?
^^^
contemplates the existence or non-extistence of worm-raping - firmly denounces the existence of God.
hehe
> I believe worms don't have the concept of "rape" because there is no evidence of it.
I believe God exists because we are completely surrounded by it.
>If everything is God, and God is "Good" then everything is good.
You can't simply make proclomations>>15925489
>if it's all God,
You raised your hands and claimed it's " all God". You forgot "free will".
By "surrounded by it", I was referring to nature, earth, the sun, the tide, the universe, the sun factories in the universe. rain, natural food, oxygen, the earth's magnetic field, DNA, reproduction …etc
Thanks
>So you're the arbiter of where the line is drawn between God/Good…and evil?
I never said I was - you're inferring it because it simplfies the argument making it easier for you believe you have a response. Thanks
humans are flawed. all of us.
I like to believe God looks at us like we look at animals. We see the lion TEARING open a zebra's asshole. In lion-world, he might feel guilty for doing it because it goes against lion-religion, but we as the top-most on the food chain look at it more with interest than with judgement.
>This is q research not a Bible study.
I guess Q never once mentions God in his drops, right anon?
>Jesus said among those born to women there is none greater than John, but the least in the kingdom of God is greater than He
"least" = "meekest", anon.
You're enterpreting "least" as "worst"
>None born to women is greater than John.
If john was "greatest", then there was a "second greatest" and a "third greatest". Having a top-most "great" doesn't preclude other levels of "greatness."
>I didn't say John was greatest, I said none born to women is greater than John,
Not mine:
"Jesus spoke using many traits of ordinary language, and forcing an interpretation on the passage that does not take into account the ordinary ways that language is used and people communicate ideas only leaves people with twisted conclusions.
Here Jesus is not making a point about John so much as he is making a point about the significance of being included in the Kingdom of heaven. There is a comparison being made about relative significance, but this has nothing to do with passing judgement on John as being in or out of the kingdom. In fact we have every reason to believe that he was himself included in it.
Basically, you're asking the wrong question. It's not a matter of what John the Baptist lacked or that made the other disciples great. In fact the point of the passage is exactly the opposite of that: the success or failure, greatness or smallness of our lives from an earthly view has exactly no bearing on our status in the Kingdom.
The point about John the Baptist was simply that although he played a very special role history a role itself foretold as one who would prepare the way at the coming of the Messiah this did not make him special in the Kingdom because that placement is dependent on the work of the Son of Man, not that of John. What greater honor could a man have than to be the immediate herald of the greatest event in all of history? And yet that honor and distinction is shown as insignificant compared to the honor that we are all given as believers grafted into God's family being made co-inheritors with Christ in His kingdom.
All this verse shows us is that any earthly rankings in honor are utterly irrelevant when it comes to our membership in the Kingdom."
>"none are greater" also implies "none are lessor"
No , it doesn't.
None is greater than infinity
something is definitely lesser than infinity.
>No anon, that's someone trying to explain away what Jesus really said.
So what are you trying to do? Are you not attempting to explain what Jesus said?
>I'm sharing Truth.
.anon…your enterpreting what Jesus "meant" ..just like everyone else in the world. What makes your enterpretation "truth"?
he forgot "gitmo terrorist apologist"
> isn't sauce, or even accurate.
Where does the Bible state is the origin of man?
Where does science state the first civilization emerged from?
>Was Lazerus immortal?
No. Lazarus was not resurrected, he was resuscitated with his mortal body.
>Where does the Bible state is the origin of man?
>Where does science state the first civilization emerged from?
>Just answer your own questions.
The garden of eden for both.
>So Jesus became immortal.
Nobody can say. not you. not I. One can speculate he was born immortal and his "immortality" allowed his ressurection - meaning; he was "dead" in this world, but not "dead" in another.
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/article/key-components-civilization
"Civilizations first appeared in Mesopotamia (what is now Iraq) "
"Thirty-five miles north of Mosul, Iraq, about an hour's drive from Islamic State territory, was the Garden of Eden."
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-rival-gardens-of-eden-in-iraq-survived-isis-dwindling-tourists-and-each-other
Science declares Mesopotamia the birth place of civilization.
The bible declares Mesoptamia as the birthplace of man.
Science validates Bible.
>It also says the least in the kingdom of God, not kingdom of Heaven.
"Kingdom of God, also called Kingdom Of Heaven, in Christianity, the spiritual realm over which God reigns as king, or the fulfillment on Earth of God's will. The phrase occurs frequently in the New Testament, primarily used by Jesus Christ in the first three Gospels."
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Kingdom-of-God
>Göbleki Tepes is much older than Sumer or anything in Mesapotamia.
Where is the birthplace of civilization?
Image result for Birthplace of civilization
Mesopotamia
Mesopotamia, the area between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers (in modern day Iraq), is often referred to as the cradle of civilization because it is the first place where complex urban centers grew.
>Göbelki Tepes, in Turkey, is from around 8000 - 9.500 BC.
>Do the math, which one is older?
I don't know why you're arguming with me anon, it's world-accepted that Mesopotamia provided the FIRST evidence of civiliazation. You're not going to convince me of anything. Thanks.