-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Exodus 20:9-11 (Creation)
- Thread starter Xalith
- Start date
Then why does the bible warn us of false Jesus? Considering your Jesus is different from the Jesus in the bible..I would tend to think your Jesus isn't the biblical Jesus.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,270
- 52,669
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,270
- 52,669
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
Oh, wait!
You believe in Jesus Michael, not Jesus Christ.
Sorry.
Upvote
0
If you say so:
Mark 13:21-22 And then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘Look, there he is!’ do not believe it.
For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect.
Upvote
0
No not specifically but if the revelation is a different gospel it's false. The bible does say that.
By the way are we getting off topic with this? But maybe it pertinent. Kinds helps explain why you believe in Evolution and not the Bible
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Upvote
0
Colter
Member
You know, you're right, if the term "false Christ" is synonymous with a false Jesus then you are right and I was wrong. I was thinking about the term "false prophets." When you said a false Jesus I didn't ever remember Jesus saying a "false Jesus". But still, you are right.
We've had people throughout the ages think they are Jesus, there is one now in Russia. He has followers all over the world apparently. We could probably go to Time Square today and find someone who thinks he's Jesus.
The Jesus of the Urantia Book is the same Jesus that you quoted, only he sent us his entire life story. With the Urantia Revelation we now have much more information about Jesus, who he is, where he came from, what he taught and where he is now. We also have much more information about the history of our world, the double default etc.
Upvote
0
Colter
Member
Not really but if you throw darts you're sure to hit something.
DEITY CONCEPTS AMONG THE SEMITES
"The early Semites regarded everything as being indwelt by a spirit. There were spirits of the animal and vegetable worlds; annual spirits, the lord of progeny; spirits of fire, water, and air; a veritable pantheon of spirits to be feared and worshiped. And the teaching of Melchizedek regarding a Universal Creator never fully destroyed the belief in these subordinate spirits or nature gods.
"The progress of the Hebrews from polytheism through henotheism to monotheism was not an unbroken and continuous conceptual development. They experienced many retrogressions in the evolution of their Deity concepts, while during any one epoch there existed varying ideas of God among different groups of Semite believers. From time to time numerous terms were applied to their concepts of God, and in order to prevent confusion these various Deity titles will be defined as they pertain to the evolution of Jewish theology:
1.Yahweh was the god of the southern Palestinian tribes, who associated this concept of deity with Mount Horeb, the Sinai volcano. Yahweh was merely one of the hundreds and thousands of nature gods which held the attention and claimed the worship of the Semitic tribes and peoples.
2. El Elyon. For centuries after Melchizedek's sojourn at Salem his doctrine of Deity persisted in various versions but was generally connoted by the term El Elyon, the Most High God of heaven. Many Semites, including the immediate descendants of Abraham, at various times worshiped both Yahweh and El Elyon.
3. El Shaddai. It is difficult to explain what El Shaddai stood for. This idea of God was a composite derived from the teachings of Amenemope's Book of Wisdom modified by Ikhnaton's doctrine of Aton and further influenced by Melchizedek's teachings embodied in the concept of El Elyon. But as the concept of El Shaddai permeated the Hebrew mind, it became thoroughly colored with the Yahweh beliefs of the desert.
One of the dominant ideas of the religion of this era was the Egyptian concept of divine Providence, the teaching that material prosperity was a reward for serving El Shaddai.
4. El. Amid all this confusion of terminology and haziness of concept, many devout believers sincerely endeavored to worship all of these evolving ideas of divinity, and there grew up the practice of referring to this composite Deity as El. And this term included still other of the Bedouin nature gods.
5. Elohim. In Kish and Ur there long persisted Sumerian-Chaldean groups who taught a three-in-one God concept founded on the traditions of the days of Adam and Melchizedek. This doctrine was carried to Egypt, where this Trinity was worshiped under the name of Elohim, or in the singular as Eloah. The philosophic circles of Egypt and later Alexandrian teachers of Hebraic extraction taught this unity of pluralistic Gods, and many of Moses' advisers at the time of the exodus believed in this Trinity. But the concept of the trinitarian Elohim never became a real part of Hebrew theology until after they had come under the political influence of the Babylonians.
6. Sundry names. The Semites disliked to speak the name of their Deity, and they therefore resorted to numerous appellations from time to time, such as: The Spirit of God, The Lord, The Angel of the Lord, The Almighty, The Holy One, The Most High, Adonai, The Ancient of Days, The Lord God of Israel, The Creator of heaven and Earth, Kyrios, Jah, The Lord of Hosts, and The Father in Heaven.
Jehovah is a term which in recent times has been employed to designate the completed concept of Yahweh which finally evolved in the long Hebrews experience. But the name Jehovah did not come into use until fifteen hundred years after the times of Jesus.
Up to about 2000 B.C., Mount Horeb was intermittently active as a volcano, occasional eruptions occurring as late as the time of the sojourn of the Israelites in this region. The fire and smoke, together with the thunderous detonations associated with the eruptions of this volcanic mountain, all impressed and awed the Bedouins of the surrounding regions and caused them greatly to fear Yahweh. This spirit of Mount Horeb later became the god of the Hebrew Semite, and they eventually believed him to be supreme over all other gods.
96:1.12 The Canaanites had long revered Yahweh, and although many of the Kenites believed more or less in El Elyon, the supergod of the Salem religion, a majority of the Canaanites held loosely to the worship of the old tribal deities. They were hardly willing to abandon their national deities in favor of an international, not to say an interplanetary, God. They were not universal-deity minded, and therefore these tribes continued to worship their tribal deities, including Yahweh and the silver and golden calves which symbolized the Bedouin herders' concept of the spirit of the Sinai volcano.
The Syrians, while worshiping their gods, also believed in Yahweh of the Hebrews, for their prophets said to the Syrian king: "Their gods are gods of the hills; therefore they were stronger than we; but let us fight against them on the plain, and surely we shall be stronger than they."
As man advances in culture, the lesser gods are subordinated to a supreme deity; the great Jove persists only as an exclamation. The monotheists keep their subordinate gods as spirits, demons, fates, Nereids, fairies, brownies, dwarfs, banshees, and the evil eye. The Hebrews passed through henotheism and long believed in the existence of gods other than Yahweh, but they increasingly held that these foreign deities were subordinate to Yahweh. They conceded the actuality of Chemosh, god of the Amorites, but maintained that he was subordinate to Yahweh.
The idea of Yahweh has undergone the most extensive development of all the mortal theories of God. Its progressive evolution can only be compared with the metamorphosis of the Buddha concept in Asia, which in the end led to the concept of the Universal Absolute even as the Yahweh concept finally led to the idea of the Universal Father. But as a matter of historic fact, it should be understood that, while the Jews thus changed their views of Deity from the tribal god of Mount Horeb to the loving and merciful Creator Father of later times, they did not change his name; they continued all the way along to call this evolving concept of Deity, Yahweh." UB 1955
Upvote
0
- Nov 21, 2008
- 53,413
- 11,948
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Notice that when "lamentable" fraud appears in the methods to promote junk-science evolutionism - the response is often to "double down" on those methods rather than reject them.
Othaniel Marsh came up with his fraudulent horse sequence by "arranging fossils" that merely "look like" they would go very well in a certain "arranged" sequence to "tell a story -- easy enough to tell" that was not science.
And what response do we get from evolutionists 60 years after the fraud was discovered? "still doubling down".
The "emotional effect" of arranging something that "looks like" it would go in a certain sequence if one were trying to tell a certain kind of "story" is just too tempting from the evolutionist.
=========================================================================
Caught in the act (Watch as these atheist evolutionist scientists confess)
G.G. Simpson in 1951 – evolutionism is a “done deal” and horse series is one of the clearest and most convincing example.
“The history of the horse family is still one of the clearest and most convincing for showing that organisms really have evolved. . . There really is no point nowadays in continuing to collect and to study fossils simply to determine whether or not evolution is a fact. The question has been decisively answered in the affirmative.” 2 Simpson, George G. 1951. Horses. Oxford University Press.
Outright confession –about the fraudulent horse series on display in the Smithsonian
"The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in nature."—G.G. Simpson, Life of the Past (1953), p. 119.
"I admit that an awful lot of that [imaginary stories??] has gotten into the textbooks as though it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit downstairs [in the American Museum of Natural History] is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared perhaps 50 years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now I think that that is lamentable ..."
Niles Eldredge, as quoted in Luther D Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, 4th ed. 1988, pg 78.
================================
How is it that the history of the horse family - on display in the Smithsonian to this very day in 2016 as an arrangement fabricated by Othaniel Marsh -- is a fossil sequence "story" declared to "have never happened in nature" in the 1950's - by their own atheist scientists.
Irrefutable evidence of the junk-science nature of blind-faith evolutionism -- does not "vanish" simply because your Urantia preference does not find that fact of history 'convenient' -- I think we can all see that.
False.
"I admit that an awful lot of that [imaginary stories??] has gotten into the textbooks as though it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit downstairs [in the American Museum of Natural History] is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared perhaps 50 years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now I think that that is lamentable ..."
Niles Eldredge, as quoted in Luther D Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, 4th ed. 1988, pg 78.
Your fictional revisionism claims that Eldredge thinks it is 'lamentable" that "so many proofs of horse evolution are now known"
- as IF that was the case with Othaniel Marsh's fraudulent horse series.
The fraud was simply "arranging fossils' regardless of how they are actually found in the fossil record -- merely 'wishing' that it might be true that they would have been found in that emotionally pleasing sequence showing smooth orthogenic transformation over time.
It was a "story easy enough tell" but it certainly was NOT - science.
Thus even the atheist evolutionist can admit "it was LAMENTABLE"
Meanwhile the T.E. is stuck at "all news is good news! err... umm... right?"
The revisionist history your are attempting with this confirmed fraud does not hold up.
And what is more - junk-science should be expected to employ many decades long frauds to tell it's stories and then continue with that same story after it was exposed - simply for 'emotional effect' - a pleasing sequence to view.
Upvote
0
- Nov 21, 2008
- 53,413
- 11,948
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
And does Urantia contradict the Bible as you so often claim it does?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
