Why Should Jesus Love Me?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#533174 May 12, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text> you dont know, but I know...GOD. yes God created. to believe otherwise makes one a fool.. you,
trifecta1, I can respect you for "believing" that but when it comes to knowing it, you are claiming a knowledge that no human being has. Are you stating you have greater knowledge than the 7 billion plus other humans on this planet?

I am telling you the honest truth, based on current knowledge, and this is very widely published and accepted by most human beings. God is believed in, but God is not proved to exist.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#533175 May 12, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I do have a stand on him. On his neck.
Are you capable of using an analogy that doesn't involve physical contact between us?

You standing on me, me jumping up on you, you shoving things in my colon, you chewing on me, you wanting me to roll over and get personal with a body orifice, etc, etc?

You are one creepy dude!

Whatever latent desires are working their way to the surface, I am really not interested as I try not to concern myself with that aspect of people's personal lives. Just leave me out of it is all i am saying

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#533176 May 12, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks. Skom wants to rely on words in a book. Sound familiar?
A lawyer who thinks people relying on the definitions of words when communicating with other people is a bad thing?

Your entire profession is based on you being able to convey a story of innocent to a jury. Of all people you should understand the importance of not just making up your own definitions of words as people understanding what you are saying is paramount to the defense you provide your client

You are really arguing the person who goes by the standard of communication historically used throughout our country is the one in the wrong and the people making up their own definitions for words are in the right?

Well, it does explain all your free time I guess

Oh. btw you responded to Ians about me. HL will be along shortly to remind you of "piling on"

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#533177 May 12, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
It has nothing to do with some desire on my part to own "spirituality" any more then I want to own the definition of "car" because I work in an auto plant. My personal connection to the he word doesn't generate any desire to claim ownership. If that were the case it would make more sense I would want to deny the spiritual experiences of people from other faiths over that of the unbeliever.
No matter what the word is, I simply go by its generally used understanding. An understanding formed by commonly accepted definitions.
My question I guess is why do you want to claim a word that by definition doesn't seem to apply to you?
Why not extraordinary or awe-inspiring Or even a word like transcendental that doesn't have to be specifically supernatural or spiritual?
It just seems like you wanting the word "spirituality" would be like you wanting the word "religious" experience. I personally don't understand the point
Like I said, it makes no difference to me though, but I understand why it causes confusion when people who don't believe in the supernatural use that word.
Tell you what.

I'm not interested in claiming words, just in having spiritual experiences.

So here's my offer: You go by whatever definition you want, and I get to have spiritual experiences without the supernatural.

Deal?
mztza

Mesa, AZ

#533178 May 12, 2013
too late for that question,
JESUS already proved that,
by dying on the cross
otherwise, he wouldn't have done it
for JESUS, it wasn't a sacrifice,
he willing did it, so that in time like a prodigal son, we would have a chance, for paradise with him
how, many willingly for love, to defend, to protect, principles even honor, would die for them

we see it, willing to die for country, missionaries in 3rd world countries, police, firefighters,
all of them, trying to give everybody a chance
thats why JESUS did that, to give EVERYBODY a chance,
because, whether you believe or not
JESUS, believes we are all worth it
AS LOVED

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#533179 May 12, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, kind of like when someone jokes about the love between a man and his wife and wanting to cause them a divorce by trying to tempt the woman to engage in meaningless sex with her against her moral and religious beliefs. And whose motivation in part seems to be getting satisfaction out of the harm it would cause the husband.
No matter how low love is placed by others, you need to look up to see it from where you are.
You would do better by being straightforward, than by couching your point in sarcasm.
mike

AOL

#533180 May 12, 2013
blind man n the bleachers wrote:
Greetings Everyone!
We say what we say or someone else says are "facts". Yet, we say we are always learning. Facts can not be proven as facts. Because we don't know it all. Things can seem to be facts because based on the information we have they are. But new information is discovered and those facts change. Therefore they are not really facts. Most all "facts" that are presented, have a counter set of "facts". Control the terms of the conversation and you control the conversation. Present "facts" according to your view. Attack the inteligence, or any other thing you can find to get those with an opposing view distracted with and you control the terms of the conversation. Not with great knowledge of a topic. But with indults and bulling tactics. This only makes you look inteligent to others who also rely on these tactics. It is not a search for truth. It is a search for making one feel better about themself by degrading others. And it is quite sad. It indicates an inferiority complex in a person who is trying to find self worth. But this aproach will not give self worth. It will only bring momentery satisfaction. It gets the mind off of ones true view of themself for a moment and then leaves one feeling more empty then before. It is much like the person who seeks love. They resort to lust. Always resorting to sexual relations or witty sexual comments to cover for their lack of love. You do have worth. It is in God. And you are loved. It too is in God. Both through Jesus Christ. It is not a physical thing. It is a spiritual thing. Which is where the need is. In the spirit. And the need can only be met, through the spirit. Just some of my thoughts on the matter.
Have a great day everyone :)
You are loved :)
B-man
Wait!

This post would make sense if you leave a GOD out of it.

"Spirit" is a "mindset", the bible express many types of "spirits".

There is no GOD, otherwise prove it.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#533181 May 12, 2013
UIDIOTRACEMAKEWORLDPEACE wrote:
<quoted text>You lies agian, so you gonna , So you swear to your Christian God (mad man-made) that you tell truth and nothing but truth , that you not lie to you teeth that you Democrat ! You supported the Illegal US wars as Xtain fundmentalism is interrelated , you right wing because you support most US illicit overseas war... it a right wing agenda of Republican , you no Democrat , caught you fibbing again! Because you have no intellectual counters to my posts! But Poster ' it Ain't necessary ' is well read and educated have no problem understand me , you can take your BS and shove! BWHAHHAHAAHAHHAhaa if you can understand my "BWHAHAHAHAAHahahahah " then i would say you are mentally deficient , yo a real SCUMbolis BWHAHHHAHAHAH did i irritate you again SCUmbolis!
Again, for you to irritate me I would have to be able to understand you and I can only follow like 5% of your postings

And no I am not lying about being a Democrat and no I never supported the wars as I have always felt we need to take care of our own people domestically before worrying about overseas, and that is even when our motives are altruistic.

I would get into more of it but I have a hunch your brain would process it into something different all together so it wouldn't be a judicious use of my time
Bongo

Bronx, NY

#533182 May 12, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you capable of using an analogy that doesn't involve physical contact between us?
You standing on me, me jumping up on you, you shoving things in my colon, you chewing on me, you wanting me to roll over and get personal with a body orifice, etc, etc?
You are one creepy dude!
Whatever latent desires are working their way to the surface, I am really not interested as I try not to concern myself with that aspect of people's pertsonal lives. Just leave me out of it is all i am saying
Hey, the creepy dude you refer to is probably the coolest dead head south of the rio grande

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#533183 May 12, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You would do better by being straightforward, than by couching your point in sarcasm.
There was nothing sarcastic about it

The disrespect she has shown towards love by finding humor in the idea of ruining someone's marriage for a cheap sexual encounter speaks for itself. So for her to claim others have brought love to a low level is amazing. She has lowered the bar worse than anything i have seen. Most the comments, even vulgar or distasteful ones, were done as casual insults. She has gotten pleasure out of repeatedly making a man's wife the target and in a way she knows will offend the most.

I can't be any more straight-forward about it. Her having to look up was metaphorical speech, not sarcasm
Bongo

Bronx, NY

#533185 May 12, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell you what.
I'm not interested in claiming words, just in having spiritual experiences.
So here's my offer: You go by whatever definition you want, and I get to have spiritual experiences without the supernatural.
Deal?
So youre searching for God? As unlikely as that is you may be lucky enough to be granted a spiritual experience by simply understanding and researching the "operation of God" .

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#533186 May 12, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell you what.
I'm not interested in claiming words, just in having spiritual experiences.
So here's my offer: You go by whatever definition you want, and I get to have spiritual experiences without the supernatural.
Deal?
Like I said, make up any definition you want for words, it makes no difference to me. I never had a vested interest other than to explain why someone, based on the accepted definitions, would probably assume an atheist hasn't had spiritual experiences. If you want to say you have, fine by me. Its a little goofy to me but hey, different strokes.
mike

AOL

#533187 May 12, 2013
blind man n the bleachers wrote:
<quoted text>
Good Morning mike :)
Yes, I think without reading first. But, when I read, I sometimes think of something that I wasn't thinking or possibly have never thought before. Reading also helps me to get an understanding of what another is thinking. I don't have to think the same or draw the same conclusions to understand what another is thinking. I think reading is a good thing and trying to understand others is a good thing.
I would say the opposite. There is a God.
It is possible to talk and do. So I do not conclude that because someone says something they must not do that thing. In fact applying that thing is evidence of a person believing that thing.
I do not agree that nothing is accomplished here. New thoughts are presented or old thoughts with a different perspective are presented. Once the new information or perspective is taken in. New actions are taken based on those new thoughts.
Thanks

What would you say was done here more often,.."talking about the GOD concept", "posting scriptures", "bragging about what a GOD has done for them", or saying, "all you need to do is believe in a GOD and everything will work-out good"?
mike

AOL

#533190 May 12, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
Mike
I know you don't understand much of this because of your unbelief but trust me when I say man can not taint the "God concept"
First of all, it isn't a concept. God is God. Second of all, God is God and man is man. And lastly what man does, man is responsible for, not God
I realize you must feel it is an effective strategy to claim being a Christian is bad and then when they don't adhere strictly to their beliefs such as "turn the other cheek" you then criticize them for not being a good Christian. It would be a Catch 22 if it made any sense. If being a Christian is a bad thing then following its rules would be a bad thing as well
Ironically that proves our point. Despite hating Christians, you call on them to act according to how Christ taught because you know that is the very standard for morality. It shows that your real issues are something else all together.
Whatever it is someone in the faith did to you (I suspect your parents from earlier conversations) that has left you so embittered to the faith as a whole and towards hundreds and hundreds of people you never met, it is time to let it go and move on.
I would think even out of a sense of self-respect you would take the position that whoever it is that has left you this way doesn't get to keep winning by having it monopolize your time, day in and day out. If you really want to get back at whoever you are angry with, some of the greatest revenge that can be had is to move on with your life and be happy.
Best of luck Mike
Thanks for the reply, and thanks for being gentle.

I'll find another post of your's to pounce on!

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#533191 May 12, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
There was nothing sarcastic about it
The disrespect she has shown towards love by finding humor in the idea of ruining someone's marriage for a cheap sexual encounter speaks for itself. So for her to claim others have brought love to a low level is amazing. She has lowered the bar worse than anything i have seen. Most the comments, even vulgar or distasteful ones, were done as casual insults. She has gotten pleasure out of repeatedly making a man's wife the target and in a way she knows will offend the most.
I can't be any more straight-forward about it. Her having to look up was metaphorical speech, not sarcasm
It was sarcasm.

Look it up in a dictionary.
mike

AOL

#533192 May 12, 2013
blind man n the bleachers wrote:
<quoted text>
Dramatic "Pat" on the back? I don't understand your thinking here. You indicated that you thought there are only words on here. Your words here seem to indicate that you now think words can convey an action of support and apreciation. Hmmm interesting.
Funny!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#533193 May 12, 2013
mike wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for the reply, and thanks for being gentle.
I'll find another post of your's to pounce on!
Heh

Until then

:)
mike

AOL

#533194 May 12, 2013
For "Skombolis"

It has been said and taught that there is a GOD. Is there something you can do, or have done, that made a person cry-out with, "There is a GOD"?

Speaking of you personally!

“Jesus is coming soon”

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#533195 May 12, 2013
mike wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for the reply, and thanks for being gentle.
I'll find another post of your's to pounce on!
You are so predictable.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#533196 May 12, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It was sarcasm.
Look it up in a dictionary.
You don;t understand the usage of sarcasm.

sarcasm
Irony employed in the service of mocking or attacking someone is sarcasm. Saying "Oh, you're soooo clever!" with sarcasm means the target is really just a dunderhead.

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/sarcasm

While her hypocrisy it and of itself maybe ironic, there was nothing ironic about my statement itself

She mentioned people taking love to a low level. I claimed she would have to look up to see it. That is not mocking or ironic. It is an accurate statement, metaphorically expressed, to show she has set a worse example than anyone else

The general use of sarcasm is to include irony by saying something while meaning the opposite. The way someone might mock someone stupid by calling them smart. My statement to HL was not meant as the opposite of anything but was a straight-forward expression of where she is on the moral scale

For a lawyer Catcher, I expect better arguments than these. And again, while it may be ironic that as a lawyer you can't come up with better ones, my statement that I expect better arguments from a lawyer is not sarcastic. I actually expect better better arguments from a lawyer

You really need to have a better understanding of how words are defined and used

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 20 min River Tam 104,506
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 42 min Gabriel 981,182
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr Phooey 672,894
News Michael Jackson's doctor: 'I told the truth' (Aug '09) 1 hr Holy Child Jehova... 389
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 1 hr Holy Child Jehova... 445,843
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 8 hr Rob Ford Sr 286,299
About Times and Laws 8 hr harvey plunkett 1
More from around the web