kroschild

Um...God wrote both Covenants, right...so are you implying that there was something wrong with His first one? Different does not necessarily mean better. KC

Ooh! ooh! I have a little theory on this one--or is it the Bible? Any time someone "prophesies" that Christ will return on XYZ day, I mark that day on my calendar as a day he cannot possibly return!

Oh, and on the "works or not" argument---does the word semantics mean anything to you? KC

Um...agnostics claim that there is no way for them to make a decision about God based on the current evidence. You cannot be an "agnostic christian". The two terms contradict one another. Literal translations are not always the best way to define something--connotation is as important, if not more. On the different religions: Using your counter-argument that it seems that Wiccans would possibly have the closest chance. They believe that all religions use different names for the same diety, and that the diety (dieties, techincally--kind of a yin and yang thing--one male, one female but both the same) names they call their god by determines which aspect of their deity they are addressing (ie if they call upon their deity at one time by the name "Aphrodite", then they are addressing the female, love-centered side of the deity. If they call upon their deity at another time by the name "Mars", then they are calling upon a male, retribution-centered side of the deity.) Essentially, Wiccans believe that all gods are different names for the same deity--they embrace all gods. The only problem with this, is that if they are wrong, and there are true gods and false gods, embracing all of them is a moot point. Just thought I'd start us off with one. KC

*wipes away the tears* Oh wow...what an expression---but can I use it on my bald dad?

Just wanted to say how I love that "apologetics" refuses to apologize! LOL KC

Where did the concept of limiting god-beliefs to "modern" beliefs come from? Are you discounting older beliefs just because they aren't modern? Do you think modernity equates with potential truth? Regards, UndecidedFrog <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ok...by your definition--they wouldn't. But what is an agnostic then? Because they ARE different. As to your reply What??? I clearly said I have studied ancient religions....I first told you Then I clarified "pagan religion" as I have studied these older religions! I think you misunderstood me. KC

I love this! Addition to Paul: sometimes forgets who he has baptized and is constantly in trouble with the authorities!

Hehe--it is confusing, I guess--we got here because WorkInProgress and I both believe women are not to teach, and now we are debating HOW submissive we are to be! LOL--I love the way these forums go all over a topic! KC

Amen! God CAN forgive you for sins you commit--otherwise, what would be the point?

No one is saying that there is more than one Spirit--we are saying that he did not LIVE IN people until after Jesus resurrection. Just wanted to clarify what we meant I think I have seen a woman actually possessed by a demon--but she wasn't a Christian at the time. And no one was claiming that she was possessed, it just appeared to us present that she might have been. The problem with knowing if someone is actually possessed by a demon is those pesky things' tendency to be invisible to the naked eye! Seriously though, I see no evidence that people cannot be possessed today. I also see no evidence that Christians cannot refuse the Spirit and accept a demon into themselves. I just refuse, based on scripture, to beleive that a Christian, indwelt by the Spirit, could be possessed. And since I know someone will ask: I do not believe that both can occur, because then where would the protection of the Spirit be?! I think that a Christian must have a heart in a state where a demon is welcomed in--whether or not they say "I want a demon", their life and heart can be accepting to one. In the cases of non-voluntary possession in the Bible, the people possessed were not Christians. Even IF you claim that Ananias and Sapphira were "possessed" it is clear that THEY themselves welcomed the demon--they are asked why THEY have lied to the Spirit! Seeking Truth, KrosChild <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Let me make sure Im understanding what you said..... There are times when we as Christians dont have the Holy Spirit dwelling in us. Is that right? I disagree with that statement KrosChild. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ooh, that wasn't clear was it? Sorry--it was written in haste. What I meant was, a Christian having the Spirit dwelling in them, in power cannot be possessed. As in, there can be no involuntary possession. The scripture that Dad Ernie pointed out sums it up well: Matt. 12

Frog, According to the dictionary: Atheist: One who denies the existence of God or gods. Agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism. An agnostic is the one who fits your analogy! A true atheist does not "buy nothing"--they claim that there is NO God, and prescribe to some other theory of existence--otherwise they are merely denying religion based on their desire to deny religion, I would assume that they have some other theory. Agnostics sit back and "buy nothing". I tried to explain this before, but perhaps the dictionary can define where I cannot? I know it is not that clean-cut. My Christian science teacher personally believes in some "atheist" beliefs, and does not think they go against Christianity. I was generalizing for the sake of space Also, how are pagan religions and Greek and Roman mythologies modern? The definition of "pagan" religions I was using was ancient religions. Those practiced by the Mesopotamians, Egyptians, etc. Eagerly awaiting the next phase in our discussion of minds, KrosChild PS This is a great discussion!

They (the angels) would be watching because in the time of the Bible, shaved or cut hair signified a prostitute--hence the reason a distinction is made between long hair as "good" and short hair as "bad". 1 Cor 11--an footnote indicating an alternate translation of the Greek: 5 And every woman who prays or prophesies with no covering on her head dishonors her head

No one is saying that there is more than one Spirit--we are saying that he did not LIVE IN people until after Jesus resurrection. Just wanted to clarify what we meant I think I have seen a woman actually possessed by a demon--but she wasn't a Christian at the time. And no one was claiming that she was possessed, it just appeared to us present that she might have been. The problem with knowing if someone is actually possessed by a demon is those pesky things' tendency to be invisible to the naked eye! Seriously though, I see no evidence that people cannot be possessed today. I also see no evidence that Christians cannot refuse the Spirit and accept a demon into themselves. I just refuse, based on scripture, to beleive that a Christian, indwelt by the Spirit, could be possessed. And since I know someone will ask: I do not believe that both can occur, because then where would the protection of the Spirit be?! I think that a Christian must have a heart in a state where a demon is welcomed in--whether or not they say "I want a demon", their life and heart can be accepting to one. In the cases of non-voluntary possession in the Bible, the people possessed were not Christians. Even IF you claim that Ananias and Sapphira were "possessed" it is clear that THEY themselves welcomed the demon--they are asked why THEY have lied to the Spirit! Seeking Truth, KrosChild

Ok, some. I actually read your comments in the other board about Pascall's argument in the other forum. Which is why I didn't ask you about your concern on this point. My point was more directed at my opening sentence about faith--that faith is something even atheists have to have--because evolution, big bang theory, etc are as difficult to prove as Christianity. Wasn't trying to convince you that Christianity should be believed in order to avoid hell, should it exist. Actually, my classes were partially online--I may be able to get my teachers to re-activate the links to the articles we had to read--some of which were pro-evolution, by the way. It is difficult to establish a base and grow on it (takes too long for posts) over messaging. After I get the links (if I can) then we could PM after you already know the base I am coming from. And we could of course argue the base! LOL Although I didn't mean to open this discussion, I won't ignore your questions! 1. I have not (obviously) studied all of these religions (containing the 10,000 gods you mention), but I do have a basic grounding in the beliefs of Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Greek and Roman mythology, Wiccan, a handful of Far Eastern religions (Buddaism, Confuscious, etc), and several pagan religions (other than Wiccan). Based on my studies, I find Christianity to be the closest as evidenced by science and my own obsesrvations. Plus, many of these teach that if you merely live a good life you are saved, or if you believe in a Creator you are saved...so even if one of these is correct, my percentage of "ending up in the same place" goes down considerably. 2. Um, no--I don't believe God can be fooled by this type of reasoning. Which is why I would never suggest someone believe based on an attempt to obtain a "get out of jail free card." Looking forward to your reply, KrosChild

Oh, now THAT'S funny! When I lost the 35lbs that had been holding me back, it was this way too! Although I wasn't necessarily trying to "eat the way Jesus did", I used that as my guide about whether to eat a certain thing or not. It helped me decide by considering whether people prior to this century would have had the thing. I mostly ate fresh vegetable, cooked without oil, eggs, bread, and small portions of meat--since meat was expensive and they didn't eat as much of it! So I considered things like sweets to be an exotic treat--they did have SOME sugar cane, after all. I would have chocolate about once every 6 weeks or more. Eventually, I lost my sweet-tooth too. Apples became SO sweet! I also tried to eat the amount of food our bodies actually need! It's amazing how little that is! Some people actually thought I was getting too small, but I kept eating the same amount (less) and I found that I hit a certain weight and stopped there! By the numbers, I wanted to lose 5 more lbs, so after a while I tried cutting out sweets altogether and working out more (i was also working out for a hour or so 3-4 days a week). I did lose those 5 lbs, but I looked awful!!! Just 5 more pounds made me look sick--I have very prominent bone structure, and they stuck out LOL. I was weighing what the doctor recommended, and I had friends my height who weighed the same (same height as me) and looked fine, but it was obvious that was not how my body was comfortable! So I swtiched back to eating what my body needed--I had plenty of energy and felt physically great at the weight--and it stuck! I would treat myself every once in a while, and I never gained any weight! I felt like I had finally found the body God had meant me to be in! Unfortunately, I only stayed that way for 2 years! I decided to go back to college, and when I did the fast-paced, no time life style snuck back up on me! Fast food became the easiest way to eat before diving back into class/work/ etc. I have decided to try and go back to my healthy lifestyle, though. Please pray that I am able to, despite distractions. I feel like I am abusing God's gift of my body by not taking care of it! I find I have digressed---I hope you all forgot my long post! LOL KrosChild

The Holy Spirit indwelled elijah, elisha enoch, daniel the prophets john the babtist. CHRIST ect. 2Pe 1:21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. In the love of CHRIST A son of man <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually this is a fairly common misconception. The first to have ever received the Spirit inwardly were the apostles, shortly following the Lord's resurrection: "And when He said this, He breathed into them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit." (John 20:22) This was the fulfillment of the Lord's word in John 7:39. If you examine the language of the Old Testament and the New Testament respectively, you will see that the Holy Spirit did not actually inwell a person until after the Lord's resurrection. This is because the matter of sin and death were both taken care of by Christ's shed blood. Therefore,the Lord's death and resurrection made possible the release of the Spirit, that He could come and indwell our human spirit. Up until the Lord's all-inclusive, all-conquoring, and life-releasing death and resurrection, the Spirit was only content to dwell with men, upon men, or empowering men to speak as God's representatives on the earth. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thank you for saying it better than I could---I was struggling with words tonight LOL--could be cos its 3 am!

Well, there's no arguing with that! I won't say I don't wonder what goes into hotdogs....but I still don't think Christians shouldn't eat meat LOL KrosChild

Jesus had the Spirit "light on him as a dove"--but obviously he was a special case! LOL "Moved by" and "indwelt" are not the same thing....non-Christians can be influenced by the Spirit for good, but that does not mean he lives in them. KrosChild

I disagree with what you claim most Christians have told you too--you cannot "know" that there is a God...if you could, then faith would be a moot point. I also believe that it takes more faith and more guts (because OUCH! if you're wrong) to be an atheist. I find it easier to believe in a creator than an accident. I have taken several classes on proving Christian faith without the Bible--archaeology, science, and philosophy--and all that I have learned point to yes. And as I took two of those classes, my faith was shaky--at one point I would have told you flat out that I didn't think there was a God. After my studies, I had to conclude that there was....I wish there was some way to share the scientific evidence with you and better explain why I believe (that it isn't blind faith) but oh wow, would it be hard over posts! If you are interested, I could attempt to do so over e-mail, or better yet put you in contact with the teacher LOL--I am but the student, after all. Still seeking, KrosChild

Remember that Eccl was probably not written in one sitting! It is not the answer to life, but the story of a journey. Solomon begins with everything is meaningless because the things he describes as having done and found meaningless are the things he did! The book is a story of his discovery that although he at one time thought everything must be meaningless, he finally realized it was because God is the only meaning, and everything else he was doing was not centered on God. Try reading it again, as a story with a beginning (and a beginning emotion of depression) to an end (with a realization of the truth). It's hard to understand, but then it WAS written by the wisest man ever to live! KrosChild

I WISH that could help me remember Nebula! The thing is, I know WHY it is visible, I just can't remember the order of the planets LOL Never was good at astronomy.... KrosChild

First, when Jesus died Satan was bound. So, before that he had more rein--all "possessions" before the resurrection were not combating the Holy Spirit for room (as the original question in this forum asks); the Holy Spirit did not indwell before Pentecost, as far as I can tell. So as far as I can see, all demonic possessions before Acts are moot for this argument. There are no instances that I can find of Christians becoming demon-possessed (none clarified as possession by the casting out of the demon. Satan can USE people who let him (and we are all weak enough to let him at some point or another), but as far as I can see, He cannot possess a person who has the Spirit inside of them. I agree with Ayin Jade's response to the scriptures in question in previous posts. I just thought I would add the point that prior to the resurrection, the Holy Spirit's indwelling didn't exist and therefore was not present to "battle" for place in the person. KrosChild

That about sums it up! I love that we have a similiar opinion and are debating anyway ! LOL KrosChild

It is merely a theory--he is stated as having fulfilled the other requirements in Luke 1:15. Acts 21:24-31 shows Paul sharing in the vows of some men who are to be Nazarites.