No Christians are not wasting their lives in worship of Elohiym (who you and others call "God"). You, even if you don't know this, still worship. Let me help you with that:
[Irrelevant crap deleted.]
Weren't you a Muslim not too long ago?
Mr_C Intern
Joined: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 202
Location: Dallas, TX
Posted:
Wed Nov 29, 2006 8:36 am
CENTEROFBAPTISTWORSHIP wrote:
Mr_C wrote:
CENTEROFBAPTISTWORSHIP,
Help me understand. You're demonstrating that we worship by demonstrating that God has a body? Would you please connect these dots for me?
What exactly don't you get? Yah Elohiym (Theos in the New Testament) has a body, thus man is worshipping that which he and she can see. Elohiym are those beings high above. That's how the word "Elohiym" translates. Elohiym are beings in this world and outside of this world. We are both worshipping ourselves as Elohiym (refer to Exodus 7:1, John 10:34) and beings who come to this planet as Yah Elohiym (what some called Aliens, extraterrestials).
Do you follow? I mean what do you not get?
Now I just feel silly, because I don't understand this concept at all. It might help me if we simplified things and defined our terms. I'll try:
Yah:
One of the names of God used in the Hebrew Bible. (
source
)
Elohiym:
Code:
Hebrew grammar
Elohim has plural morphological form in Hebrew, but it is used with singular verbs and adjectives in the Hebrew text when the particular meaning of the God of Israel (a singular deity) is traditionally understood. Thus the very first words of the Bible are breshit bara Elohim, where bara is a verb inflected as third person singular masculine perfect. If Elohim were an ordinary plural word, then the plural verb form bar'u would have been used in this sentence instead. Such plural grammatical forms are in fact found in cases where Elohim has semantically plural reference (not referring to the God of Israel).
So not only is your translation flawed, but by calling Elohim "aliens", you are basically saying you believe in Raëlism. Are you aware of that? Also, you have yet to show that I am worshipping anybody. Now granted, if we stretch the definition enough, We are all probably worshipping money and sex and all that good stuff, but even with that loose definition, I'm still not worshipping anybody, just material things.
Just because you believe in aliens doesn't mean that I worship them. Cool?
Mr_C Intern
Joined: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 202
Location: Dallas, TX
Posted:
Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:20 am
NationofYinepuBaptists, I thought that you would like to see something that you wrote:
Yeah I was trying to see if I could make the bible valid for me. I see that it is still absurd to even try what I was trying.
There is a huge disconnect between this statement and...well...trying it again. Don't you think?
baddogma Grand Poster
Joined: Feb 02, 2006
Posts: 1749
Location: Colorado
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 2:11 am
Quote:
Well I'm not unstable, but I guess I'll just stay away since you all think that.
The ONLY thing you have been stable in is your instability!
No one here owes you any response until you return the same consideration.
You have consistently blown off every rebuttal to your posts and cry like a baby every time anyone insults you.
Pick a name and stick to it.
Answer posts or get the fuck out!
Leszek Resident
Joined: Jan 31, 2005
Posts: 372
Location: Canada
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:10 am
This is "The Quote", for now on referred to as TQ.
Quote:
This quote says warship of FSM is necessary.
Quote from CENTEROFBAPTISTWORSHIP very slightly modified.
Quote:
Now let's deal with the reason why it is necessary to pray according to the TQ. We are not debating if it is made up. We are not debating the truth, or falsehood of the TQ at all. We are, here, debating if worship is necessary. I ask this because atheist say it is not.
It is kind of silly.
The atheist says it is not necessary to worship BECAUSE the Bible is made up and untrue.
baddogma Grand Poster
Joined: Feb 02, 2006
Posts: 1749
Location: Colorado
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:44 am
IS THIS GUY DENSE OR WHAT?
Mr_C Intern
Joined: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 202
Location: Dallas, TX
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:22 am
I'm sad that he hasn't posted back. Maybe he's reached his limit on email addresses from Yahoo or something. Either way, it's fun to have a logical punching bag and I hope he comes back.
zxcvcxz The Learned
Joined: Jun 08, 2006
Posts: 104
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:55 am
These logical punching bags tire me out... Like pumching bareknuckle... after a while it really hurts...
CENTEROFBAPTISTWORSHIP Newbie First Class
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 46
Location: TOLEDO, OHIO
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:32 pm
Mr_C wrote:
I'm sad that he hasn't posted back. Maybe he's reached his limit on email addresses from Yahoo or something. Either way, it's fun to have a logical punching bag and I hope he comes back.
I'll post as needed. I haven't gone anywhere. And this name is not going to change.
I'll respond to a scriptural argument but that's it!
CENTEROFBAPTISTWORSHIP Newbie First Class
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 46
Location: TOLEDO, OHIO
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:34 pm
baddogma wrote:
IS THIS GUY DENSE OR WHAT?
Let's see:
Main Entry: dense
Pronunciation: 'den(t)s
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): dens·er; dens·est
Etymology: Latin densus; akin to Greek dasys thick with hair or leaves
1 a : marked by compactness or crowding together of parts <dense> <dense> b : having a high mass per unit volume <carbon>
2 a : slow to understand : STUPID, THICKHEADED <was> b : EXTREME <dense>
3 : having between any two elements at least one element <the>
4 : demanding concentration to follow or comprehend <dense>
5 : having high or relatively high opacity <a> <a>
synonym see STUPID
- dense·ly adverb
- dense·ness /'den(t)-sn&s/ noun
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 46
Location: TOLEDO, OHIO
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:37 pm
CENTER OF BAPTIST WORSHIP wrote:
Yeah I was trying to see if I could make the bible valid for me. I see that it is still absurd to even try what I was trying.
Mr_C wrote:
There is a huge disconnect between this statement and...well...trying it again. Don't you think?
Nope because accepting "God" as a reality is still theism. Yet saying "God" is not in scripture and that thus there is no "God" but Elohiym/ Theos (which we and Aliens are) is a form of Atheism. I'm not, by the way, A Raelian because there is a doctrine associated with that, that I do not believe in.
zxcvcxz The Learned
Joined: Jun 08, 2006
Posts: 104
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:41 pm
Ok.
Yes, worship i
s
totally unnecessary.
Next.
CENTEROFBAPTISTWORSHIP Newbie First Class
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 46
Location: TOLEDO, OHIO
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:42 pm
zxcvcxz wrote:
Ok.
Yes, worship i
s
totally unnecessary.
Next.
You know as well as I that a statement by itself does not make a thing true.
Leszek Resident
Joined: Jan 31, 2005
Posts: 372
Location: Canada
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:03 pm
CENTEROFBAPTISTWORSHIP wrote:
zxcvcxz wrote:
Ok.
Yes, worship i
s
totally unnecessary.
Next.
You know as well as I that a statement by itself does not make a thing true.
And what is the Bible if not a series of statements by itself?
CENTEROFBAPTISTWORSHIP Newbie First Class
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 46
Location: TOLEDO, OHIO
Posted:
Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:14 pm
zxcvcxz wrote:
And what is the Bible if not a series of statements by itself?
First of all when you say Bible let's understand what you mean. Are we talking about the translation, or the Aramic/ Hebrew and Greek that these books originally came in. When we get into the originally languages we go into something way deeper than what we see in the kJV bible.
View next topic View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
* You can syndicate our news and blog using the file