The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Praise the Lord, my dog is a Catholic... Options
Ms. B. Have
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 7:13:14 AM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686
jacobusmaximus wrote:
Well I am so glad that you and Silva are at one. Be happy.

That has nothing to do with me or Silva, it is just a matter of not tearing pages out of historybooks. Know your roots.




Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
HWNN1961
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 12:20:31 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 2/13/2010
Posts: 3,498
Neurons: 9,763
Ms. B. Have wrote:
HWNN1961 I must honestly admit that it is as clear as mud to me what you are tying to say. I read your post several times over again, but I have not the slightest idea what I should do with this information, I fear you have to give it another more specific try.





I'll try:

First, it expresses my own view. That what does and does not have a soul isn't for man to decide. I allow for my limited ability to perceive the infinate and so I allow for the possibility that other entities have souls.

Second, that a closed mind, a slavish reliance upon one's own narrow theology is sadly on display by some on this thread. My personal favorite being the habit of quoting from one's own holy book to justify the opinions that one has derived from that holy book...the eptiome of circular reasoning, and a blast to laugh at!

"Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless, and do no wrong". (Knight's Oath, Kingdom of Heaven)
Ms. B. Have
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 12:41:45 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686
Thank you HWNN1961, apparently we share the same opinion about your mentioned first and second point, except that I do not laugh at someone else's opinion and reasoning, but that we express that in a different language.

Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 4:25:40 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 10,895
Neurons: 341,278
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
HW says, "...First, it expresses my own view. That what does and does not have a soul isn't for man to decide. I allow for my limited ability to perceive the infinate and so I allow for the possibility that other entities have souls..."

It is not a question of 'deciding' anything. I am not making decisions about who or what has a soul. If you want to use the broad interpretation of 'soul', then yes, everything that lives and breaths has a soul. Our soul is our whole being. Fine. Dogs have souls. New York has a soul.
But we have been discussing this matter in the context of life after death and I don't know of any serious theological literature that teaches that dogs etc., will have resurrection bodies and will be raised to life to Eternity in the Kingdom of God.

I remember, therefore I am.
almostfreebird
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 5:01:41 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/22/2011
Posts: 2,820
Neurons: 7,024
Location: Japan

So it's like jacobusmaximu is saying I have to go to Hell.

It's OK.

I had so much beer I could go to Hell
In Japan May 3,4,5 are holiday,



Ms. B. Have
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 6:25:35 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686
jacobusmaximus wrote:
But we have been discussing this matter in the context of life after death and I don't know of any serious theological literature that teaches that dogs etc., will have resurrection bodies and will be raised to life to Eternity in the Kingdom of God.

Dear brother J. Maximus.

Please read Genesis 2, about the Garden of Eden, so called Paradise.
God created plants and animals for Paradise! There were even vicious snakes in Paradise. That was before the fall of man. Adam and Eve did not yet misbehaved themselves, they were not yet sinners and needed no salvation, until Eve got her first Mac from the snake and they got knowledge of Good and Evil from an Apple. (Proofs that they even had internet in Paradise)

I know, the Garden of Eden and the Kingdom of Heaven are not the same, but why is it such a problem for you to live with the idea that a God who created animals for the Garden of Eden might be willing to let them also into the Kingdom of Heaven? What's the problem? Why should he create animals for Paradise but not for Heaven?

Can you give us a quote from the bible that clearly says that animals are not allowed there where we go hereafter? I don't know of any serious theological literature that teaches that dogs etc. are not welcome. Most theologues I know have other worries.

I think the fastest way to solve this problem is to wait a couple of years untill we are dead, and then we will see. If there are no dogs and cats there then I'll give you a bottle of wine. Communion wine of course.



Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
Ms. B. Have
Posted: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 7:37:06 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686


The Bible suggests from beginning to end that animals may have souls. In Genesis 1 20, 24, for instance, the Hebrew word nepesh is used to refer to animals. While this word can simply mean "creature" or "living thing," in the Old Testament it is often understood to mean "soul." And in Revelation 8:9, the Greek word psuche which can mean heart, mind, or soul-is used about sea creatures.





Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
Ms. B. Have
Posted: Thursday, May 03, 2012 7:29:56 AM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686
jacobusmaximus wrote:
.......Just in case you are serious Ms.B.Have, animals, I feel sure, do not have souls anymore than trees and flowers. Dogs were not made for heaven, but mankind was. And all men are sinners. They can only get to Heaven by accepting Christ as their Lord and Saviour. Dogs can't do that. They were never meant to.


Quote:
Job 38 :1-5

Then the Lord spoke out of the storm. He said:

“Who is this that obscures my plans
with words without knowledge?
Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.
Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?

39 1:5
Do you know when the mountain goats give birth?
Do you watch when the doe bears her fawn?
Do you count the months till they bear?
Do you know the time they give birth?
They crouch down and bring forth their young;
their labor pains are ended.
Their young thrive and grow strong in the wilds;
they leave and do not return.
Who let the wild donkey go free?
Who untied its ropes?


Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
percivalpecksniff
Posted: Thursday, May 03, 2012 8:53:10 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 1,523
Neurons: 3,404
Location: United Kingdom
Man does not have a soul... he is a soul. That is why the bible speaks of sould dying by the edge of the sword


Ezekiel 18:4

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

4 Behold, all [a]souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine. The soul who sins will die.


Soul here denotes the whole person



Genesis 2:7

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

7 Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living [a]being.


Footnotes:a.Genesis 2:7 Lit soul


Nephesh is the Hebrew word for soul


It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Ms. B. Have
Posted: Thursday, May 03, 2012 9:36:47 AM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686
percivalpecksniff wrote:
Nephesh is the Hebrew word for soul


Thank you percivalpecksniff, but as said before the word "Nepesh" can also be translated into “creature”.

It's just a matter of interpretation and translation, even for those who read the bible in the original language. Because of that the Protestants can give themselves a bible in which all animals are creatures, closing heavensdoor for their pets..

Meanwhile the Catholics give themselves a bible in which all animals are souls. By doing so they open the doors of the Kingdom of Heaven for their pets. "Praise the Lord my dog is a Catholic".

But the truth is, no one of is us is able to know how that Kingdom of Heaven looks like, it's far beyond our imagination. Therefore the words God spoke to Job are also spoken to us all:

“Who is this that obscures my plans
with words without knowledge?”


Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
percivalpecksniff
Posted: Thursday, May 03, 2012 12:11:33 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 1,523
Neurons: 3,404
Location: United Kingdom
Behave... you said: Thank you percivalpecksniff, but as said before the word "Nepesh" can also be translated into “creature”.


Not so... that is not so. It's clear that the Hebrew word Nephesh has only meaning and is soul or life, they are synonymous. It is the false notion that the soul is immortal that led translators to vary the word... just as they translated Sheol as pit grave and hell to suit dogma.

The word 'immortality' (athanasia) occurs four times in the Bible and never in connection with the soul. The notion of the immortality of the soul was promulgated by Tertullian in the third century and reinforced by Plato. It was only established as a teaching by the Catholics at the Council of Nicea in 325. It part of false Christianity. They also, at that council, adopted many pagan customs and claimed they had the authority to 'Christianize' them. They at one stroke 'converted' an empire to falsehood.

I am in complete disagreement with you interpretation of the Bible. Indeed:

“Who is this that obscures my plans
with words without knowledge?”






It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Ms. B. Have
Posted: Thursday, May 03, 2012 3:15:37 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686
Dear pp.

My reply on your post is not my personal opinion, it is what is called “Theology” and that is a skill that can be learned just like Medicine or Physics. Like a physician is trained in how to read an Electroencephalography or a radiography a theologue is trained in how to “read” the bible. Reading the bible is not just a matter of believe, it is a scientific skill. One thing that you will learn if you study this science is that the opinion that a certain word is not open for interpretation is an interpretation in itself, or the statement that the bible as the word of God is not open for interpretation is an interpretation in itself.

If you say that the word “Nephesh” has only the meaning of soul or life, then that is your personal interpretation of the word Nephesh because it is a Hebrew word and those who have studied this language, and the translation of that language into English will tell you that it is in English variously translated as "soul, self, life, creature, person, appetite, mind, living being, desire, emotion, passion."

If you personally do not agree with that then you change the meaning of the word “Nephesh” not in a theological manner but in a linguistical way. In fact what you are doing is telling us that the word “Car” only may be used for Chrysler and Ford but not for Volkswagen.

A greater mistake you make with the word “Soul” The way you use this word is a so called “Contradictio in terminis”

Quote:
The free dictionary
Contradictio in terminis
(Latin for contradiction in terms) refers to a combination of words whose meanings are in conflict with one another. Examples are "liquid ice" or "square circle"


Of course the word “soul” is used in manny different ways in our language, but here we are talking a theological issue about the immortality of animals and what we can find in the bible concerning this question. In such a discussion the word “soul” is per definition used as that part of life that is immortal.

Quote:
The free dictionary
Soul: The spiritual nature of humans, regarded as immortal, separable from the body at death, and susceptible to happiness or misery in a future state.”


Because here the word “soul” is per definition immortal, you should not use that word if you are talking about something that is mortal. If you do that then you start polluting the discussion by changing meaning of the word. So if you talk about something that is mortal, you need to use another word, for instance mind or spirit or creature. If we have a discussion about fish, you should not use that word suddenly for animals with feathers.

So what you in fact are doing, is first you say the word Nephesh can only be translated into soul, not creature, and then you change the meaning of the world soul into creature, because you say it is not immortal. In this way you are causing a linguistical and theological disorder in the conversation.

Therefore "Exegesis" as a component of theology is a science, a study of words, there meaning and how they are used in the scriptures to prevent this kind of confusion of tongues.

So if I may gave you an advice, before you try to beat a theologian on her own specialism, first study theology yourself otherwise our conversations will always end up in a complete logical, linguistical and theological chaos.



Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
percivalpecksniff
Posted: Thursday, May 03, 2012 4:57:37 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 1,523
Neurons: 3,404
Location: United Kingdom
Are you making the assumption that I have not studied the Hebrew language? Any Hebrew scholar worth their salt would say that nephesh means soul as a life. Lokk in any interlinear of note.

As for theology I have read the Bible six times right through, and cross referenced much of it.

the·ol·o·gy (th-l-j)
n. pl. the·ol·o·gies
1. The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.
2. A system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions

From you rprevious posts you have not struck me as one who has extensive knowledge, theological or otherwise, of the Bible.

I think you and I must respectively agree to differ. I stand by all I have said and wish to leave it on that note since I see no future in a debate with you.


It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
Ms. B. Have
Posted: Friday, May 04, 2012 7:58:59 AM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686
percivalpecksniff wrote:
From you rprevious posts you have not struck me as one who has extensive knowledge, theological or otherwise, of the Bible.

Thank you percivalpecksniff, I take that as a compliment. I already got worried that I made too many references to the bible in this topic. I prefer to talk about my own ideas with use of my own words instead of throwing bibles to make myself clear. Most theologues never do that because they know that if the other one throws back another translation they have a problem, a theological problem. To give you one example, you threw a quote of Ezekiel towards me to proof that in Hebrew the soul is mortal:

Quote:

“Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine. The soul who sins will die.”

Now I trow back to you exactly the same verse, but taken out of the “Complete Jewish Bible” (CJB). As you know Hebrew is a Jewish language, so Jews know this language better then we do, and see how they translate Ezekiel 18:4

Quote:

“Look, all lives belong to me — both the parent’s life and the child’s life are equally mine — so it is the person who sins, himself, who must die.”

This translation is telling me that "life" is immortal because it belongs to God, and that only that part of me that is not immortal "himself who must die" is "the person who sins". Here "life" is the same as what we call the immortal soul, who is never a sinner.

Where is your mortal soul now? And that is the issue here, it is all a matter of translation. And that is why theologues can perform more miracles then God herself, they even can change God from man into woman if they want. And to give a dog a soul is no problem, because Ezekiel 18:4 says: "all lives belong to me", that is not only human lives.

percivalpecksniff wrote:

I think you and I must respectively agree to differ. I stand by all I have said and wish to leave it on that note since I see no future in a debate with you.

With your bottomline we come miraculously to an agreement. Now we can be friends again.


Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
RubyMoon
Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 12:40:25 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/30/2009
Posts: 1,666
Neurons: 4,834
Location: United States
FYI - This isn't about "Catholic dogs", but I just saw this highlighted on the news (TV)... "Scientists use MRI to understand what your dog is thinking" - (fascinating clip and mini-lecture !)

Emory University Scientists investigate the dog brain with MRI, etc.
http://www.examiner.com/video/researchers-at-emory-university-study-dog-brains
Epiphileon
Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 12:50:35 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/22/2009
Posts: 3,937
Neurons: 57,384
Hey Ruby, NECN right? I just saw the same story.

Question authority. How do you know, that you know, what you know?
Ray41
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 12:45:57 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/9/2010
Posts: 1,943
Neurons: 45,980
Location: Orange, New South Wales, Australia
Ditto Ruby and Epi.
Saw this on the news a few nights back. They trained a Border Collie to stay completely still with it's head resting in a cradle (all this on command) while they took the MRI images. This is the first time it has ever been done as there was always too much movement in previous attempts.
Think They chose a collie for this demanding training,Applause

Now to check Ruby's link.

PS: None of my working sheep dogs were Catholic, they were all Bush Baptists.Shhh

Edit; Thank you for the link Ruby, better than a 40 second run on the TV news.

I see that I should have mentioned 'while the dog was conscious' as they obviously had MRI's of anaesthetised dogs from Vets who were looking for injury/disease.

While I live I grow.
GeorgeV
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 2:17:22 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/3/2009
Posts: 888
Neurons: 2,410
Location: Canada
.
Re: May 2, 2012 - Painting of resting dogs

That's nothing. I've seen reproductions of dogs playing cards.
.

Brain-washing starts in the cradle. - Arthur Koestler
DavidScott
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 6:56:14 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/2/2012
Posts: 711
Neurons: 2,076
I haven't read this entire conversation: not that I would want to. IF there is a heaven, and IF there is a God who would deny eternal bliss to dogs, (or cats, or butterflies, or elephants,) then I want no part of it, and I devote no praise to such a vicious and heartless "deity." Neither would Heaven be Heaven if women are not there; eternity would be as sterile and joyless as this physical life would be without the blessing of mothers, sisters and lovers. Nor would I want any part of an eternity without, (and I am not being sarcastic here,) even the existence of humble rocks, as was suggested on one of the photoshopped church placards. Why would God create a place in which only men would spend eternity, without those animate or inanimate companions we so love in this preparatory existence? Why not a Heaven wherein only Women exist, without subjugation to aggressive men? Or wherein men only exist according to each woman's wishes, one woman's son exists in her reality, and yet, as the abusive husband who beat his wife, does not exist in the wife's reality?
God, should he or she exist, must surely laugh at the arrogance of humans in their imaginings of his/her nature. So you disagree...or some of you disagree...again, such arrogance is the essence of sin, if there is such a thing. Some say that the unforgivable sin is denial of the Holy Ghost: what greater denial is there than the rejection of the infinite possibilities of the true nature of God for a definition of His nature which fulfills only your arrogant and self-serving interpretation of His reality?
pedro
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 7:43:03 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/21/2009
Posts: 12,932
Neurons: 58,635
GeorgeV wrote:
.
Re: May 2, 2012 - Painting of resting dogs

That's nothing. I've seen reproductions of dogs playing cards.
.



an oldie I know..

A man went to visit a friend and was amazed to find him playing chess with his dog. He watched the game in astonishment for a while. "I can hardly believe my eyes!" he exclaimed. "That's the smartest dog I've ever seen."

"Nah, he's not so smart," the friend replied. "I've beaten him three games out of five."



All good ideas arrive by chance- Max Ernst
pedro
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 7:43:25 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/21/2009
Posts: 12,932
Neurons: 58,635
GeorgeV wrote:
.
Re: May 2, 2012 - Painting of resting dogs

That's nothing. I've seen reproductions of dogs playing cards.
.



an oldie I know..

A man went to visit a friend and was amazed to find him playing chess with his dog. He watched the game in astonishment for a while. "I can hardly believe my eyes!" he exclaimed. "That's the smartest dog I've ever seen."

"Nah, he's not so smart," the friend replied. "I've beaten him three games out of five."



All good ideas arrive by chance- Max Ernst
Jyrkkä Jätkä
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 7:55:04 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 39,136
Neurons: 284,583
Location: Helsinki, Southern Finland Province, Finland
I'm so proud I could assemble a jigsaw puzzle only in three weeks while the tag in the box said "From 3 to 5 years".


In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
Linorth
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 8:30:15 AM

Rank: Newbie

Joined: 4/18/2012
Posts: 30
Neurons: 109
Location: Tehrān, Tehran, Iran
i get that its a joke which leads to a serious conversation :D

but about dogs going to heaven , in Qur'an , there is a story about "companions of the cave and the tomb stone" which are some guys who sleep about 300 years and woke up after that. and its a miracles of god.
which in that story those guys have a dog which help them in the story, and in that story even dog went to sleep just like those humans.

so i personally think if there is a god and all these stories about heaven and hell are actually true.
so there is no difference between humans and other creatures in gods eyes.




but in the other hand it took me about 10 minutes to search about the name of those guys in english and write my post.
and in that 10 minutes, 20 child died in Africa because of hunger and sickness. ( one child in every 30 seconds - its a national Statistic )
so i don't think there is a god at all.
or if there is in fact a god , he just doesn't give a shit about us.
so i don't bother thinking about heaven and hell or this kind of shits at all :)


You can always contact me on Facebook. My username there is "Linorth" ;)
DavidScott
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 8:31:36 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/2/2012
Posts: 711
Neurons: 2,076
Pedro...while you may not have intended to post the same thing twice, it deserved to be posted twice! JJ...I wish I were so clever, it has been 3 years now, and I may need the full 5 to get mine done.d'oh!
DavidScott
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 9:07:25 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/2/2012
Posts: 711
Neurons: 2,076
Bingo...if God is so cruel and uncaring, I have to agree, why grovel at his feet? Perhaps we are capable of greater kindness and generosity than He. I am appalled at the suffering and violence this world sustains.
While this seems to suggest a sadistic supreme being, I see it as suggestive of one of at least two alternative possibilities. It is said that Man was created in God's image. Which "image," then, was the pattern used? If God is ALL, then Man is nothing more than one infinitesimal Image of God. If we were indeed the Image of God, we would reflect the totality of everything to the extent that we encompassed infinity. On the other hand, if God is seperate and apart from His creation, and we are made in His image, then He is cruel beyond all comprehension, yet capable, simultaneously, of acts of great compassion, works of profound beauty, and actions of inexplicable capriciousness. So: clearly we are not of the first order. Are we thus, and is he thus, of the second order? It would seem so.
There is, I believe, a further possibility (and in fact an infinity of further possibilities), and that is, that which some would call God is nothing more, and nothing less, than the sum of all possibilities occurring in what we perceive as a series of events, over time. Otherwise, if sin were a reality, and punishment an inevitability, God himself would be guilty, and subject to damnation according to His own laws.
RubyMoon
Posted: Thursday, May 24, 2012 9:56:48 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/30/2009
Posts: 1,666
Neurons: 4,834
Location: United States
Hi Epi - Not sure what TV station I was watching, probably NBC News (NECN?)... anyway, just wanted to offer the link. You're welcome, Ray41, etc.
I find research like this most interesting since it further paves the way for studying nervous system/nerve tissue damage/brain abnormalities in humans (from the many forms of debilitating paralysis to Alzheimer's Disease, other types of dementia, etc.) - Damaged nerve tissue "resists" regeneration ( a process present in lower animals).

Okay... Thanks again for the response, and you're welcome.
(Don't mean to skip over your posts, DavidScott - I find your views interesting.)
Taliesin ap Elphin
Posted: Friday, May 25, 2012 12:05:27 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 3/17/2012
Posts: 54
Neurons: 106
Location: United States
Bingo wrote:

so i don't think there is a god at all.
or if there is in fact a god , he just doesn't give a shit about us.
so i don't bother thinking about heaven and hell or this kind of shits at all :)

God is perfect, and he truly does care for us. He created the world originally perfect, and we humans decided to rebel against him. Because of that, we live a life surrounded by the side-effects of sin: famine, disease, sorrow, death, pain, etc. "but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." - Romans 5:8
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." - John 3:16

"Unless someone cares a whole lot about something, nothing is going to change. It's not." - Dr. Seuss
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Saturday, May 26, 2012 3:28:48 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 10,895
Neurons: 341,278
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Taliesin ap Elphin wrote:
Bingo wrote:

so i don't think there is a god at all.
or if there is in fact a god , he just doesn't give a shit about us.
so i don't bother thinking about heaven and hell or this kind of shits at all :)

God is perfect, and he truly does care for us. He created the world originally perfect, and we humans decided to rebel against him. Because of that, we live a life surrounded by the side-effects of sin: famine, disease, sorrow, death, pain, etc. "but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." - Romans 5:8
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." - John 3:16


So good, TaE. So good. Like a drink of the clearest, sweetest water to a very thirsty man.

I remember, therefore I am.
almostfreebird
Posted: Saturday, May 26, 2012 4:00:21 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/22/2011
Posts: 2,820
Neurons: 7,024
Location: Japan
jacobusmaximus wrote:
Taliesin ap Elphin wrote:
Bingo wrote:

so i don't think there is a god at all.
or if there is in fact a god , he just doesn't give a shit about us.
so i don't bother thinking about heaven and hell or this kind of shits at all :)

God is perfect, and he truly does care for us. He created the world originally perfect, and we humans decided to rebel against him. Because of that, we live a life surrounded by the side-effects of sin: famine, disease, sorrow, death, pain, etc. "but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." - Romans 5:8
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." - John 3:16


So good, TaE. So good. Like a drink of the clearest, sweetest water to a very thirsty man.




These dogs go to heaven with yous, don't they?













jacobusmaximus
Posted: Saturday, May 26, 2012 4:48:26 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 10,895
Neurons: 341,278
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
They might sail there on their barque, if allowed, we hear (6 down).

I remember, therefore I am.
Ms. B. Have
Posted: Saturday, May 26, 2012 8:49:25 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686
jacobusmaximus wrote:
So good, TaE. So good. Like a drink of the clearest, sweetest water to a very thirsty man.


(74) He said, "O Lord, there are many around the drinking trough, but there is nothing in the cistern."

(75) Jesus said, "Many are standing at the door, but it is the solitary who will enter the bridal chamber."

Gospel of Thomas



Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Sunday, May 27, 2012 1:11:06 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 10,895
Neurons: 341,278
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Ms. B. Have wrote:
jacobusmaximus wrote:
So good, TaE. So good. Like a drink of the clearest, sweetest water to a very thirsty man.


(74) He said, "O Lord, there are many around the drinking trough, but there is nothing in the cistern."

(75) Jesus said, "Many are standing at the door, but it is the solitary who will enter the bridal chamber."

Gospel of Thomas


There is too much doubt about this non-canonical 'Gospel'.

I remember, therefore I am.
Ms. B. Have
Posted: Sunday, May 27, 2012 2:17:03 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 4/6/2012
Posts: 355
Neurons: 686
jacobusmaximus wrote:
There is too much doubt about this non-canonical 'Gospel'.

If that is what you prefer to believe, then please do not study history.

According to many scholars, the Gospel of Thomas is older and more original than the canonical Gospels, and as some say, this Gospel is probably the closest we can come to the teachings of the historical Jesus. There are found that many fragments of this Gospel that there is a theory that this Gospel has been the most copied, read and therefore the most important Gospel for the first generations of Christians. It could be that this Gospel is used as an important source of information for the later written Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke.

Recent discoveries gives us more and more reason to doubt the trustworthiness of the canonical Gospels. It is a pity that Calvin did not have all these sources of information and knowledge about the roots of Christianity as we do have now.

The lost Gospels 2/9


Perception selects, and makes the world we see.
Taliesin ap Elphin
Posted: Monday, May 28, 2012 1:18:03 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 3/17/2012
Posts: 54
Neurons: 106
Location: United States
Ms. B. Have wrote:
According to many scholars, the Gospel of Thomas is older and more original than the canonical Gospels,

Besides BBC news, what would be the names of some of the scholars you mentioned? Because I would like to do some research into this - especially since I have not read the "Gospel of Thomas." Because this is non-canonical, I am rather biased against it, because I do not consider to be inspired by God, but rather simply written by a person who felt like writing something.

"Unless someone cares a whole lot about something, nothing is going to change. It's not." - Dr. Seuss
almostfreebird
Posted: Monday, May 28, 2012 6:40:00 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/22/2011
Posts: 2,820
Neurons: 7,024
Location: Japan
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2017 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.