Why I’m no longer a Christian

[waaasssuuup]

Kaitlin the Wolf Witch wrote:

<quoted text>
And there are few people here more self-righteous than you.
You disgust me.

c'mon kait, really?:(

[waaasssuuup]

karl44 wrote:

<quoted text>
it turns out that people wind up just as dead, regardless who kills them.
christianity is a failed moral system

how dare you try to push your immoral religion of eternal extinction in here; don't you know that there could be children listening???

[New Age Spiritual Leader]

Grace Walker wrote:

<quoted text>
The mystery of the gospel is God’s message of salvation for the dispensation of the grace of God. The mystery of the gospel included revelation referred to as the “mystery of godliness”(I Tim. 3:15-16). The gospel message is the good news of salvation.

WOW!!

AMAZING!!

Finally someone who has discovered the answers to the "mysteries of the gospels".

Where have you been all this time? Why haven't you been on national TV exclaiming that these mysteries have been resolved?

In truth, your speculation [personal interpretation] is actually beginning to show your arrogance. You may want to put it in check.

Yes - arrogance. You have been then only one on this forum who has claimed to understand the "mysteries of the gospel", therefore, they are no longer mysteries, since you resolved the "mystery", as you have done.

Please provide support for your conclusion.

Thanks in advance!

[water_nymph]

waaasssuuup wrote:

<quoted text>
c'mon kait, really?:(

You must have lost your day job and had to get one on second shift where you can steal from yet another employer.

[New Age Spiritual Leader]

Anti-Christ wrote:

More tidbits:
God Lied: The Serpent Told the Truth
Genesis 2:16-17(KJV):

<<snipped to respond>>
I agree, because your response is in line with this ancient text:

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/apocjn-long.htm...

NOTE the last paragraph...

20 And the Rulers took him and they placed him in paradise. And they said to him,'Eat that is in idleness. For indeed their delight is bitter and their beauty is licentious. For their delight is deception and their trees are impiety. And their fruit is an incurable poison and their promise is death. And in the midst of paradise, they planted the tree of their life.

But I, I will teach you what the mystery of their life is, the plan they made with each other, the likeness of their spirit.

Its root is bitter and its branches are deaths. Its shade is hate and deception dwells in its leaves. And its blossom is the anoint­ment of evil. And its fruit is death, and desire is its seed, and it blossoms from the darkness. The dwelling place of those who taste from it is Hades, and the dark is their resting place.

But what they call 'the tree of the knowledge of what is good and evil' is the Epinoia of the light. They (the rulers) remained in front of it in order that he might not look up to his fullness and come to know the nakedness of his shamefulness. But as for me, I set them right so that they would eat."

And I said to the Savior, "Lord, was it not the snake who taught Adam so that he would eat?"

The Savior laughed and said, "The snake taught them to eat from a wicked desire to sow which belongs to destruction, in order that he (Adam) would become useful to it. And it knew that he was dis­obedient to it because the light of Epinoia dwelled in him, making him more correct in his thinking than the Chief Ruler.

21 And he wanted to bring out the power which he had given to him. And he brought a trance upon Adam."

And I said to the Savior, "What is the trance?"

He said, "It is not as Moses wrote as you heard. For he said in his first book that he laid him down in sleep, but rather it concerned his sensibility. For indeed it is said by the prophet,'I will make their hearts heavy so that they might neither give heed nor see.'

Then the Epinoia of the light hid in him.

And the Chief Ruler wanted to bring her from his rib. But the Epinoia of the light is not graspable. Although the dark pursued her, it did not lay hold of her.

And he brought forth a part of his power from him (Adam). And he created another molded form in a woman's shape according to the image of Epinoia who had appeared to him. And into the molded form of womanhood he put the part which he had taken from the power of the human— not 'his rib' as Moses said. And he saw the woman beside him.

Immediately, the luminous Epinoia appeared for she had uncovered the veil which had been on his understanding. He became sober from the drunkenness of the darkness and he recognized his likeness. And he said,'Now this is bone from my bones and flesh from my flesh. Because of this, man will leave his father and his mother and he will cling to his wife and they will no longer be two but a single flesh.' For his partner will be sent to him and he will leave his father and his mother.

It is our sister Sophia who came down in innocence in order that she might correct her deficiency. Because of this she was called Zoe (Life), the mother of the living by Pronoia of the au­thority of heaven and [...] to him [...]. And through her they tasted the perfect knowledge.

In the form of an eagle, I appeared on the tree of knowledge, which is the Epinoia from the pure, luminous Pronoia, so that I might teach them and awaken them from the depth of the sleep. For they were both in a fallen state and they recognized their na­kedness. Epinoia appeared to them as light, awakening their thought.

[New Age Spiritual Leader]

Anti-Christ wrote:

More tidbits:
God Lied: The Serpent Told the Truth
Genesis 2:16-17(KJV):
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying,“Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”
I had to use the New King James Version of the bible for this passage because to scholars, this passage is so blatantly wrong that in subsequent versions it was changed to cover the fact that God lied. For instance, in the NIV the passage reads:
“You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” Genesis 2:16-17(NIV)
Notice the the phrase “for in the day that you eat “was changed to “for when you eat from it “. The word “day” has been omitted because, contrary to what God said, Adam did NOT die the DAY he ate the fruit, just as the serpent said in Genesis 3:1-5:
“Has God indeed said,‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent,“We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said,‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’” Then the serpent said to the woman,“You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
First notice the woman did not relay Gods exact words. She omitted then added. She omitted by saying “God has said,‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’” when God actually said “…for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Then she added by saying “nor shall you touch it, lest you die” which God did not say. At any rate, God’s warning that “…for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” did not come to pass. Adam lived for 930 years (Genesis 5:5). So in this sense God lied because Adam did not die the day he ate of the fruit, and the serpent told the truth because not only did Adam live well beyond the day he ate, he also acquired the knowledge of good and evil just as the serpent said he would. In fact God himself later gave this same knowledge of good and evil to man in the form of the Torah.

and this passage also confirms what you say:

"The Savior laughed and said, "The snake taught them to eat from a wicked desire to sow which belongs to destruction, in order that he (Adam) would become useful to it. And it knew that he was dis­obedient to it because the light of Epinoia dwelled in him, making him more correct in his thinking than the Chief Ruler. "

[Al Garcia]

water_nymph wrote:

<quoted text>How can someone hide from an all-knowing deity? That's crazy stuff right there.

It seems like it was more of a test to see if they (Adam and Eve) would step forward and come clean voluntarily. As we all know that we can't hide from God according to the Bible.

[karl44]

waaasssuuup wrote:

<quoted text>
you're funny! i've told you many times that it's my prerogative how i use my time when working on projects. working on-line is not like working at a vets clinic - end of story! also, my wife knows that i talk on these threads and she's very familiar with my sense of humor - end of story!
now, do the right thing by not lying and slandering me over this anymore or you're being a deceitful brat!

she thinks it funny
that you make passes at other women, but get tuned down consistently.

[Skombolis]

New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:

<quoted text>
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.."
Just ponder of this statement for a moment, and then apply it to the issue of contraceptives for "Christian" companies.
It is a problem with Obamacare.
Just thinking out loud. Mainly off-topic, but it is an interesting take on "the separation of church and state".
Cheers!
http://politix.topix.com/homepage/3549-obamac...

Hey New-age, long time no see

I don't think that is a law respecting one religion. It is simply saying if you are a religious organization (and this would apply to any) if your business is run solely by those int faith then it is not subject to some secular rules. Respecting it IMO would allow then not to follow legislature passed simply because they don't want to because of religious beliefs even though employees may not feel the same. If it is a private organization with just religious affiliates then I think they have the right not to be forced to do something against their beliefs. But so long as it affects other people they don't share their beliefs they have to abide by it and I think that is fair

(T) Peace

[Skombolis]

New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:

<quoted text>
Hi Skom - good to see ya posting.
If they are watching you, it means they "like you" - don't you know anything.
Think of your Jr. High days - guys picked on girls because they liked them; girls picked on guys, because they liked them.
So called "Christians" "watch" [future "picking ons" in the works], because they like you.
It's that simple!
:o)

Heh

One never knows!

Although I think perhaps some people simply have an over-exaggerated sense of self-importance and take Topix a wee bit too seriously. Perhaps they are projecting their own insecurities as well as I think it is hilarious not only someone would tell me people are watching and therefore judging me based on my posts but that they would think anyone would care. I can only assume it would matter to them if they think it matters to others.

[Skombolis]

HipGnosis wrote:

<quoted text>Well, there you go. That's what was missing from the initial "outburst", shall we say. I had no idea what your angle was so I held off waiting for further posts to illustrate what you were after. Others here responded more quickly, assuming you were resurrecting the "Christian nation for Christians" story. I think it was a fair assumption.
I hope you have a great day today.
Peace.
HipG

Well I would say if someone wasn't sure what my initial intent was they had other posts for context. After that I posted to W_N letting her know people were concerned about her son and did she have any updates to pass along. I then posted to G saying I understood he didn't post what he did out of ego but because his integrity was called into question and even his competency. I then copied a reply from Lawest to W_N. Again,those came AFTER the quotes. W_N even responded to the one about her son so I sincerely doubt she didn't she the quotes until the next day which she had to pass to get to my post about her son. She saw another poster jump on me and wanted to ride the bandwagon. There are a lot of posters like that on Topix. As there are a lot of followers in life in general.

And considering even in the quote with the posts I said I was simply providing it for background as I have since what it is they believed debated a lot and thought the quotes shed light on that. So I guess I will just agree to disagree. W-N has a history with me and quite frankly with most looking to nit-pick and fight in situations most wouldn't have even thought to try to make an issue

As for the quotes I never said it summed up their entire lives. But it spoke specifically to what they based their personal morals on and that they felt society suffered when moving away from God. 2 of the quotes had the entire text. The other i shortened from a much longer paragraph just because it was pretty much reiterating the same things. I think it is very biased to selectively decide quotes basically cherry-picked and meaningless when they say something someone doesn't like unless you never rely on quotes for this reason then I would say fair enough. Quotes generally give a good idea of how someone feels about a specific subject. I don't think we need their life's work to get a pretty good idea of how they feel based on a specific quote

As to whether or not their idea of God was the same as mine is not relevant to me. I don't need anybody else's beliefs to mirror mine. But I respect the fact that these men of power recognized their is a higher power to the universe that men should answer to and that moving away from God can negatively impact us as a society. I agree with that. Organized religion may be a different argument but not God.

I still don't see why you feel those quotes are misleading. Can you please provide me other information for context so I can see why you think that? Thanks

Hope your day has been a good one

(T) Peace

[Doctor REALITY]

There is no such thing as 'USED to be' a christian. If you're not a christian today...you were NEVER a REAL christan to begin with.

[Chess Jurist]

Doctor REALITY wrote:

There is no such thing as 'USED to be' a christian. If you're not a christian today...you were NEVER a REAL christan to begin with.

You're lying.

[Skombolis]

Edit New Age

Sorry, mneant to say if your business is run solely by those of faith AND all their employess are of the same faith as well. Obviously just cause the owner does or doesn't believe something he shouldn't be able to force his beliefs on others or withhold benefits from those who don't share his beliefs.

But at the same if an entire group feels a certain way for religious reasons then I don't think the government should be able to force them to do something they feel is against their beliefs. Within reason of course. Obviously someone can't say, well my religion tells me it is wrong to pay my employees their salary is something like that which is in violation of law and contract.

But if I owed a business put together for religious reasons and with people who shared my beliefs or said they did then no way would I pay for women to get ru40 or any other 'morning after' pill as I am against abortion and I think it is only fair I wouldn't have to if. But I understand why I would be opening myself up to the liability if I didn't hire based on belief but then tried not to pay for something claiming belief

(T0 Peace

[water_nymph]

Skombolis wrote:

Edit New Age
Sorry, mneant to say if your business is run solely by those of faith AND all their employess are of the same faith as well. Obviously just cause the owner does or doesn't believe something he shouldn't be able to force his beliefs on others or withhold benefits from those who don't share his beliefs.
But at the same if an entire group feels a certain way for religious reasons then I don't think the government should be able to force them to do something they feel is against their beliefs. Within reason of course. Obviously someone can't say, well my religion tells me it is wrong to pay my employees their salary is something like that which is in violation of law and contract.
But if I owed a business put together for religious reasons and with people who shared my beliefs or said they did then no way would I pay for women to get ru40 or any other 'morning after' pill as I am against abortion and I think it is only fair I wouldn't have to if. But I understand why I would be opening myself up to the liability if I didn't hire based on belief but then tried not to pay for something claiming belief
(T0 Peace

Skombolis, the employer is not paying for these things. The Insurance companies are. But I agree that no one should be forced to take this action if it is against what they believe in.

I think if insurance companies and Medicare cover Viagra and other like drugs, they should cover birth control for women though. It's not either/or. It should be that they either cover both, or neither.

[NoStress4me]

Grace Walker wrote:

<quoted text>
Hello NS..Havent talked to you in a long time. How are you and how was your thanksgiving? God Bless You and your family

Hello Grace, it’s good to read you. I decided to take a week long holiday from Topix, and came back the other day to over 2k posts to read on this thread alone. So I am jumping forward and back trying to get up to speed again. Doing good here, and had a wonderful thanksgiving. I ended up with a new stove out of the deal (long story). Now it’s time for the dash to get everything ready for Christmas LOL! I hope that all is well in your slice of the world, and that your Thanksgiving was everything you wished and more. May God Bless You and yours.

[Skombolis]

AnnieJ wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry about the deletion but there is never room for both of us in the same post!
many people that would hunt down homosexuals, Muslims...people of color and yes...even some that would hunt down Christians.
I posted this the other day in response to that poster on WSJLM...
First they came...
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
It saddens me somewhat to know that I have posted with people for the last few years...many have called me friend...and I am not sure which of them would "speak out".
I am passionate about this subject for more than just one reason...it is why I did not respond to your post to me on WSJLM the other day and why I said that I didn't know if I would get involved in this conversation.
Okay...almost out of those little characters...sometimes that is the only way to get me to stop!
Have a great day Steve.

LOL, yeah you and I need to ask Topix for a 'character extension' as 4000 is never enough to get both an initial post and reply with us!

I did think it would have been enough that I said I was posting it simply to provide some insight into something I have seen debated, mainly on speculation, a lot. But I didn't see your earlier exchange (the one I was talking about was on "Prove there is a God) and in fairness people do mainly post quotes that mirror their their own feelings so I didn't mind you asking for clarification.

My days or trying to brow-beat someone into acting better are over. Even rebuking someone who not only will never listen but is happy to be rebuked as their goal is to annoy people is something I almost never do any more either. instead I simply combat ignorance with the truth.

That same person you were talking about tried attacking Lee for not agreeing homosexuality was a much worse sins then others. It was east enough to show the only three times the Bible spoke to or directly implied any sin was worse than another is when God spoke to Moses, when Jesus spoke of who turned him in and to blasphemy the Holy Spirit. Which now in hindsight gives me something else to think about when it comes to the debate in WSJLM earlier about is The Holy Spirit just the spirit of God and not a third entity. Because all 3 times the greater sin was a direct sin upon God. I then showed him the Galatians verse showing all sins of the flesh are equal and asked for a rebuttal and got none.

But my point is why get all worked up trying to chastise an idiot who is never going to change and loves getting people mad so it gives them just what they want? I correct those normally that I expect better from as I hope they do the same for me. And if people are predisposed to think in a prejudiced manner because of individual bad experiences that is their problem not mine. Yes there are some vile people on Topix that claim to be believers/ But there are some vile people on Topix that claim to be agnostic or atheist that are just as vile. I would think the type of person someone is can be shown on how they react whether they still treat people as individuals or give into bigotry because of it. I have been on Topix quote a while now. I have never once generalized atheists or agnostics or those of another faith.

And one more think on the speaking out. When people have rebuked repeatedly and it has done no good, when everybody already knows what someone is about...is it really really speaking out against injustice or more like wanting a pound of flesh? Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the latter but IMO that is all it is about at this point. IMHO

(T) Peace

[water_nymph]

NoStress4me wrote:

<quoted text>
Hello Grace, it’s good to read you. I decided to take a week long holiday from Topix, and came back the other day to over 2k posts to read on this thread alone. So I am jumping forward and back trying to get up to speed again. Doing good here, and had a wonderful thanksgiving. I ended up with a new stove out of the deal (long story). Now it’s time for the dash to get everything ready for Christmas LOL! I hope that all is well in your slice of the world, and that your Thanksgiving was everything you wished and more. May God Bless You and yours.

I think we are going to go out for Christmas dinner this year. It's just so much easier on everyone and we get to spend more time talking and less time cooking and washing dishes/cleaning kitchen. We'll make desserts and homemade breads to make sandwiches while sitting up late watching movies.

[Chess Jurist]

Skombolis wrote:

Edit New Age
Sorry, mneant to say if your business is run solely by those of faith AND all their employess are of the same faith as well. Obviously just cause the owner does or doesn't believe something he shouldn't be able to force his beliefs on others or withhold benefits from those who don't share his beliefs.
But at the same if an entire group feels a certain way for religious reasons then I don't think the government should be able to force them to do something they feel is against their beliefs. Within reason of course. Obviously someone can't say, well my religion tells me it is wrong to pay my employees their salary is something like that which is in violation of law and contract.
But if I owed a business put together for religious reasons and with people who shared my beliefs or said they did then no way would I pay for women to get ru40 or any other 'morning after' pill as I am against abortion and I think it is only fair I wouldn't have to if. But I understand why I would be opening myself up to the liability if I didn't hire based on belief but then tried not to pay for something claiming belief
(T0 Peace

I think what you are saying is that the government needs a "compelling interest" to proscribe behavior based on well-established religious principles. And I believe that was the test historically applied -- until the 1990 US Supreme Court case that allowed states to ban the use of peyote by Native Americans in religious rituals.

It's been awhile since I paid much attention to this, so someone may have better info than I do.

[Chess Jurist]

Chess Jurist wrote:

<quoted text>
....
It's been awhile since I paid much attention to this, so someone may have better info than I do.

Or a better memory.