Religion is irrelevant in todays world

When you referenced "she" and did not disclose who "she" is.

Like I said, if you want to be disrespectful of another persons faith, then that/those person/persons have the equal right to be disrespectful of you and yours.

Now that you have made the claim that the Holy Spirit is female, you now need to step forward with some objective empirical evidence to support that claim. Where is that objective empirical evidence?

Your surprise is generated by your delusional mind. Yeah I commune with the Holy Spirit, but the voice is not feminine. Your logic 'worldly' oriented simply is not suited to comprehend spiritual matters. You are spiritually blind; and spiritually ignorant.

 

I have not been disrespectful to your faith. The term she was used in reference to the Holy Spirit.

This is no excuse to disrespect my mother.

Father, Son, Holy Spirit

A Father can not have a Son without involving a woman.
That woman was the Holy Spirit clearly.

God did not have sex with Mary.

Mary was used as a vessel and thus remained a virgin.

The conclusion you should be coming to is obvious.

The voice you hear is not the Holy Spirit.

 

You spoke through ignorance and still speak through ignorance regarding the Holy Spirit. It was disrespectful of you to speak of the Holy Spirit in the feminine gender, when you should know from having frequented this forum, that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, has no gender. The trinity is spirit. Not flesh and blood having gender. If you don't know those things, then you should remain quiet and unspoken on that subject.

Your infantile logic and further blaspheming of the Holy Spirit in the remainder of your text, has only awarded you a prominent spot on my prayer list... a list of prayers coming from the book of Psalms.

Have a nice evening and be informed that you have also just gained a spot on my permanent ignore list. There is no need for you to respond to this posting or any other posting of mine.

 

You speak about the Holy Spirit all the time .. what is disrespectfull is to claim that others can not speak of the Holy Spirit.

You have no proof of your version of the Holy Spirit.

It is blasphamy to speak for God. Claiming that you know things because, the Spirit said this or the Spirit said that, is claiming that what you say comes from God.

This is blasphamy.

Cover your ears, eyes, mouth, nose .. and anything else that might let the truth in.

Is that what the Holy Spirit tells you to do ?

 

I think it's very relevant in the sense that many people still believe it and it influences our political system. There's fights in schools over evolution and creationism, and public debates about gay marriage and abortion. So in that sense, it's a VERY relevant force.

 

I am not concerned in the slighted about self-deluded atheists who believe in wacko fairy tales concerning life just "popping" into existence.
I think we should all just let others believe or not believe what they want. Why do atheists always have to be SO concerned about the beliefs of others? Enforce policy and law based on their misguided hallucinations? I'll never know...

 

Calling a spade a spade is not disrespectful. Do you openly admit that you have faith in God and the Holy Spirit? You claim that my 'version' of the Holy Spirit cannot be proven. Can your version be proven?

Quoting from scripture the authority to do so, and stating my belief in the authority in the scripture, is no Blasphemy.

Are you declaring yourself to be God? If not, then please explain where there is a blasphemous statement made by me in my saying:
"Have a nice evening and be informed that you have also just gained a spot on my permanent ignore list. There is no need for you to respond to this posting or any other posting of mine ". You might now want to suggest that it is because you are on my ignore list and I am yet responding to your posting. Ask the moderators. You have been on my ignore list since I posted that comment and you are still on my ignore list. Being on my ignore list only gives me the option of choosing when I want to view what type of nonsense you are still publishing.

I don't listen well to demands either. As is evident in this posting. Besides, I have not seen you post any 'truth' as yet.

Responding to your final question: YES! And YES to my making this response.

 

Neither can be proven, but logic and looking around Gods creation should tell you that in order to for a child to be conceived .. a woman needs to be involved.

We are created in God's Image. Male, Female

Genesis tells you that if we were to take from the tree of life .. "become like us"

I claim that this refer's to "Gods" you claim that this is a reference to the trinity.

If the trinity is what is being referred to, and humans are like the Trinity entities.

Then, Father Son and Holy Spirit means that Holy Spirit is Female.

How does a Female "become like us" if there are nothing Female in the Trinity ?

It makes perfect logical sense from a scriptural standpoint that there needs to be a female somewhere in the mix yet upon hearing this you freak out and put me on your ignore list.

You are not interested in the Truth .. only your version of the Truth.

Blasphemy is what the scripture says is blasphemy. You have gone further than quoting from scripture and I have pointed out to you occasions where you have done so and given you an explanation as to why it is blasphamy.

If you want to claim the authority of God ... go ahead, but do not think for a second that am not going to call you on it.

 

I don't believe that the Holy Spirit is female. However, I do understand your logic that there should be a female goddess because of the whole "become like us". It makes sense. So I went snooping around and found something that I found interesting. Correct me if I'm wrong (it is Wiki that I found this on, but that's moderately reliable) but Elohim, which is sometimes used to refer to God, actually is plural. "gods". When the Bible says Elohim, could it mean, maybe "The Father and The Mother"? It makes sense in my mind. What do you guys think?

 

I do not think that the reference in Genesis is to the Holy Spirit. God refers the ones creating man as plural, and then again when Adam and Eve are put out of the Garden of Eden. To me this gives the message that there are other Gods.

Israel chose to worship just the one God, and that is fine, but it does not mean there are not others.

The idea of the existence of multiple Gods does not sit well with some Christians so they claim God was referring to the Trinity but I have never heard a convincing arguement for this.

If one does believe that "US" is God referring to himself as more than one entity or Trinity .. and humans are made in the image of "US", then there needs to be a female component to the Trinity.

The Holy Spirit then should be this Female component. Father, Son, Mother completes the circle.

Paul was very anti-woman in relation to the Church. There must have been a reliance on Pauline material when choosing which books made it into the Bible because they left out scripture (Gospel of Thomas for example) that had a favorable view towards women.

 

Tsk Tsk... In that section of Genesis, The Bible spoke of the creation of man not the procreation of a child. Two completely different subject matters: procreation vs creation. Confused, aren't you.

Man is the species that God created. Male and Female are the genders involved in that species. Just like angels are a species created by God and is compared to another species in that passage of scripture: "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." Jesus was made to belong to the species 'man' and was of the male gender. The image of God by which we emulate is "spirit"... neither male nor female and definitely not hermaphroditic.

"Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:"

"as one of us" ... similar to.

In one sense of the word, that would make both of us correct. Trinity = God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Each bears the title "God" so there would be a plurality, yet the agreement that the plurality has among the three is that they would operate as ONE.

Wrong again. Each one of us is a triad. Id, Ego, and Superego; Spirit, body and soul; If we are limited to either male or female then where and what are the remaining parts?

Answered above... spirit, body, and soul.

Not hardly. You will catch on one of these days, that the scientific logic does not apply to the spiritual realm. Freak out? Not hardly... just get tired of reading the profuse amount of spiritual ignorance that issues from your mouth (keyboard).

No! Wrong again. Scripture plainly tells us that Jesus is "the way, the truth, and the life...." BTW... that is not my version of the 'Truth'... that is the bible version of the truth.

But you did not show where any scripture was at question. You only stated 'this is blasphemy'.

When I have quoted scripture, I have quoted scripture. If on the other hand, I also include my opinion about that scripture, then that is my opinion. If I say that the Holy Spirit has given me a proper instruction to a particular scripture, then the Holy Spirit has given me a proper interpretation. Now once again, where (in your overinflated egomania opinion) have I committed blasphemy. You do realize that you are gonna be required by your laws of the scientific method to show objective empirical evidence to support your claim. So go ahead and tell us all about it.

Call me on it, and I will show you again in scripture where that authority is given to Christians.

 

.

Depends .. did God create Jesus the same way man was created ?

This is a nice story but it is not orthadoxy. Jesus is God according to 99% of Christian Churches.

Yes .. the difference being the tree of life .. Immortality.

The reference is to different Gods .. not three Gods in one.

You are making things up again.

Given to you too many times to count. "The awfull horror"

In the Bible it says to "understand what this means"

What it means in general is one who sets up an institution, or a leader, who "speaks for God"

When you claim that the Holy Spirit has given you a proper interpretation .. you are claiming to speak for God.

Only Jesus has this Authority.

Jesus was baptized by the Holy Spirit ..

The early Christians Baptized in the name of Jesus .. only in the 2cnd century was this changed to "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit"

There is but one Teacher .. and you are not it.

 

When you find the answer let us know.

So What?

Jesus was also recognized as a manby 100$ of Christian Churches.

Speculation on your part. The use of the colon ) indicates an incomplete thought which leaves an opening for potentially billions of inferences, such as the one you just made.

Ah. Now you are making conclusions that are not based on fact. Can you prove that claim? Where is your objective empirical evidence to support that claim?

Not according to the science of psychology.

When and where, specifically?

Meaning what?

Where, specifically?

What is the "it" you make reference to?

Only if you believe that the Holy Spirit is God. Do you believe that?

Where is the objective empirical evidence to support that claim?

Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.

And your point?

Did I say that I was a 'teacher'? You do enjoy being presumptuous.

 

In the above post, I made a mistake... typographical error due to attempting to communicate before my morning coffee.

The error:
"Jesus was also recognized as a manby 100$ of Christian Churches."

Should be corrected to read:
"Jesus was also recognized as a man by 100% of Christian Churches."

My apologies for the error.

 

They're not logically equivalent. The god proposal requires support, skepticism does not. Atheism is the default position absent evidence for god.

In other words, there is no reason to accept a proposal as true simply because I cannot prove it false.

 

Of course there is a 'reason'. That reason would be belief. What that 'belief' is based on or motivated by is yet another issue. However, 'belief' is sustainable in and within the individual regardless of the scarcity or bountiful amount of evidence to support the proposition, because the one who holds that belief desires to continue in that belief.

 

You're confusing the word 'belief' for the word 'excuse'. A belief is the end result of analysis. A person who faces an issue they haven't considered before analyzes the information available to him, considers the logical arguments in favor of the proposal, and if the arguments match with observations, will develop a belief about that issue or subject. This is a process involving reason and logic--to be sure people can arrive at blatantly false beliefs, but that is due either to flawed logic or ignorance of the data.

That is quite different from what you propose, which is merely the act of proposing an excuse for that flawed reasoning. Belief itself is not cause to hold a belief. There are reasons that all people have for holding a belief. These reasons may be bad reasons, but they're still reasons.

 

Rationalizing is making excuses. Reason is either a cause to act or simply the process of normal thinking. Normal thinking does not necessarily mandate the use of any systematic form of logic. If you do something because you want to do it, that is a 'reason' ... If you attempt to justify that reason, then you will rationalize the act by finding an excuse other than the simple truth that "I wanted or desired to do that act".

 

Doubtful ....

 

I suppose you could call your position a type of rationalizing. "I hold my belief because I believe it..."

The two are synonymous.

Logic and formal logic often have nothing to do with one another.

 

I notice that you used quotation marks above. Who in FACT were you quoting? I KNOW that the statement you made is not my statement.

Really? Hmmm. That must be the reason why I used the word "or" as in "..or simply..."

Oh really? Do you care to expound on that one?

 

Any Christian Church that has adopted the Nicene Creed believes Jesus was more than a man, that Jesus and God are one.

The claim that has no support is your Trinity claim. The only support I need is what is written.

Matt 24:15

Awful horror/abomination of desolation

and the Holy Spirit

You claim to have direct conversations with God/ Holy Spirit.

As such you claim to speak for God.

The abomination of desolation

 

Probably... after all, they are corporations and must protect and maintain the mother corporation. Anyway, that is material for another thread. As I said before, I do not adhere to the doctrines of the 501c3 churches. So what you have stated above is irrelevant with regard to me.

And what specific thing did you have in mind that is purported to be what the scripture says in regards to the "trinity"?

That is not what you said earlier: Your earlier statement reads "In the Bible it says to "understand what this means" " While the scripture you quote reads "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand " You see, you can't even quote the scriptures correctly. So why should we pay any attention to what you say about the scripture?

And the relevance?

Again, you need to learn to read:
"Luk 3:21 ¶ Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened,
Luk 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased."

Now, who did the baptizing and who did the acknowledging of that baptism? John baptized and the Holy Spirit acknowledged by descending upon Jesus while Jesus was praying. "being baptized".... "being" meaning to exist; 'baptized' meaning past tense... or already accomplished. Therefore, the baptism of Jesus had already been accomplished and the condition of being baptized was completed before the dove descended upon Him.

OK

If you want to interpret it that way.

Where? Where is the abomination of desolation? In fact... please explain to the readers from your most profound wisdom, what is the Abomination of Desolation. The scripture refers to the "abomination that maketh desolate" in the book of Daniel. Come on now... don't be bashful.... show us how horribly ignorant you are with regard to spiritual matters.

 

Sorry, I forgot .. you make up things as you go along according to your conversations with spirits.

You claimed that the "us" God was referring to was the Trinity.

Are you that daft ? There is more than one translation but it means the same thing.

This has been explained to you, not only by myself.

I am not the one claiming to have scriptural knowledge that comes directly from God/Jesus/Holy Spirit

This is exactly what Jesus warns against in Matt 24:23 right after the passage about the "Awfull Horror"

Warning about those who claim to have direct contact with God.

These are the False Prophets ..

 

Really? Can you show an example of something that has been made up? When you do, also provide objective empirical evidence that will support your claim that such as was stated was made up and was not the product of the Holy Spirit.

OK.. so what?

Well of course there is more than one translation, and just about every translation is available on the internet. So please provide a link to the one that has the exact same language that you have used. Are you sure that they mean the same thing?

Actually Go: this is the first time that I recall speaking with you about the Abomination that maketh desolate. As for explanation of what the 'Abomination that maketh desolate' is, I truly don't believe that you have explained that one. Certainly you have not explained how that passage of scripture from Daniel is applicable to me or to anything that I have stated.

You said that to say what?

Explain what you are talking about instead of just making leading statements.

Again, how does that relate to me and anything that I have stated?

Who are false prophets?