Salvation

[Reason2believe]

---

With all due respect to you as well, it was never a neutral thing in the past, If you look the olden times especially in the US, their forefathers where grounded in the word of GOD probably the reason why america is a great country that it is now.

Certainly the majority will always rule, if you have atheist and unbelievers voting, you will certainly shift the gear to where you are leaning, but what I am trying to point out to you and hope that you see it, that the basis by which we determine time line from both sides employs faith, and that you can not hid in the reason of pure scientific data. It is not my intention to shift your gear towards mine, but to let you see that we both have faith in our understanding of time line.

That therefore based on what ever time line you may embrace, one can very well argue your point, To me by virtue of the creation of men and the fall of men in the garden of eden, shedding of blood is not of pagan origin. and I am right based on the creation time line.

Adam, eve, abel, cain etc, came from the creation of GOD and they worship GOD, to say they are pagan is totally unthinkable don't you think so sir? Excuse me sir the father of the jewish nation is abraham. where you got your twelve tribes of ISrael. and if you look at the lineage of abraham in scriptures you will see that it will traced back to adam and eve.

Don't make such a conclusion that paganism came beforeJudaism, scriptures never said that. If you look at Judaism and the Old testaments, their belief starts from Genesis 1:1 when GOD created the heavens and the earth, so where will you put paganism there?

Therefore the shedding of blood to be copied from paganism is not a confidence that one can wallow but a pit that one may fall. a trap that gives false satisfaction.

if you are looking god outside the box of Judaism and Christianity then you are not looking at the GOD of the BIBLE at all.

GOD with all HIS righteousness and power is a just and HOLY GOD, but if HE starts thinking like we humans do then HE will cease to be God, imagine your arch enemy accusing you of unjustice, and shortchanging him?

This is not to appease GOD that HIS blood should be shed for our sake, IT is for us to escape from shedding our own for HE did it already. we are bought by HIS shedding of blood.

Reasoning how GOD should behave in the basis of HIS powers and strengths in our perspective is to demote GOD to be a human puppet.

Instead of learning and knowing HIM(GOD), HIs nature and character through scriptures to understand this GOD of the BIBLE and how great and awesome HE truly is, we reject scriptures and try to challenge and fit GOD to our humanistic point of view and limit HIM to our own box.

Yes GOD shed HIS blood in the Cross of Calvary. Remember Jesus Christ?

I said the nuetral side w/n the scientific community have weight all the pros n cons of the evidences brought by the oppossing side and have come up a decision to reject creation science. To question the decision and accused them of other things like what you are suggesting(majority wins) is kinda irresponsible act on your part. Why? because you are questioning their expertise w/c is the product of lots of years of training and experience and putting their integrity into a shady area w/c you have no access.


We both base our timeline on faith? says who? Creation Scientists,right? Sorry sir but as ive said non-creationsit timeline is more reliable by virtue of scientific experimetation and experience. Unless their(creationist) timeline gets into mainstream science, my position remains the same.

okay you are right based on Creation timeline w/c by the way a timeline rejected by mainsteam science. Isnt it confusing that when certain sects in christianity gives a certain interpretation of a doctrine is being rejected for reason that it does not agree with mainstream denomination but when it comes to REAL science these same people would push the idea that its okay to entertain an idea rejected by what we call the mainstream body.

Sure i am not looking at the god of the bible because to me God is not a blood-thirsty god


The Partriarchs were not jewish thats what i said. Correct, Abraham was the Father of the Jewish nation But he wasnt jewish. If you can prove in the bible that Abraham was there during the formation of judaism then i will accept that i am wrong.


Well sir fortunately i am basing my conclusion that paganism came before judasm from real historians not from a religoius book. Did you missed what i posted previously where i said that The worship of the golden calf is an affirmation that pagansim came before judaism?

again this event(golden calf) boosted my confidence to believe that pagansim came before judaism.


Correct, that if God starts to think like human being then he ceased to be god,thats why i cant accept trhe idea that he needs blood for His justice to be satisifed because i see people doing just that. funny point!

This is not to appease god,shedding of blood is not to appease god? wow,you are flagrantly violating a Major Doctrine of christianity. Review your systematic theology sir,if you have never taken this course i suggest to take one,its not yet too late. By the way orthodox christianity has a name for someone who violates any major doctrine of christianity,its Apostasy.


i dont have a box here sir that fits God,the bible surely looks like a box.

pls answer my question..."Does God have a blood?"

[Reason2believe]

be back 2morrow...need to go shopping.

[Super Bisdak]

so diay puede ra ipamulong sa ginoo.

sa di pa ko mop adayun mangayo unta ko ug verses kung asa gisulat didto nga gi design sa ginoo ang dugo harun molimpyo sa atong sala?

kay sa akong sabot ug matud pa sa doktrina nga Kinahanglan ang DUGO to SATISY God's sense of justice.

so mangayo lang ko ug verses sir para magpamatood nga gi design sa ginoo ang dugo to cleansed our sins?

Kung susihon nato sa Old Testament,
Leviticus 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. Dinhi atong masuta nga ang dugo gikahatag aron sa pagpapas sa mga sala.

Gihisgutan usab kini kung unsa nga mga matang sa dugo, sa Leviticus 4 (kung duna kay kahigayonan masmaayo mabasa nimo bro).

Bro palihug nalang pod ko ug susi sa sinulat usab ni Apostle Paul sa Hebrews 10:1-21. Dinhi nga teksto gituki ni Apostle Paul kung unsay katoyuan sa Ginoo niining mga halad nga sinunog ug sakripisyo (kadtong naa sa daang tugon). Kadtong pag-ula sa dugo sa mga mananap didto sa Old Testament anino lang kini sa katoyuan sa Ginoo nga mao pag-ula sa dugo sa Iyang anak. Masabtan lang nato nga kining tanan gilaraw na sa Ginoo, sa wala pa matukod ang kalibutan, aron madayag ang Iyang GUGMA.

1 Peter 1:19-20. "But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you."

Ang Ginoo magpanalangin kanatong tanan!

[Super Bisdak]

pls answer my question..."Does God have a blood?"

bro, pwede ko motubag sa imong pangutana (kay basin makabulabog na hinoon ko sa inyong discussion pod ni Mr. Ho_Chia)? Gitubag naman niya imong pangutana, pero gusto lang ko mosumpay.

Ang Ginoo magpanalangin!

[Reason2believe]

Kung susihon nato sa Old Testament,
Leviticus 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. Dinhi atong masuta nga ang dugo gikahatag aron sa pagpapas sa mga sala.

Gihisgutan usab kini kung unsa nga mga matang sa dugo, sa Leviticus 4 (kung duna kay kahigayonan masmaayo mabasa nimo bro).

Bro palihug nalang pod ko ug susi sa sinulat usab ni Apostle Paul sa Hebrews 10:1-21. Dinhi nga teksto gituki ni Apostle Paul kung unsay katoyuan sa Ginoo niining mga halad nga sinunog ug sakripisyo (kadtong naa sa daang tugon). Kadtong pag-ula sa dugo sa mga mananap didto sa Old Testament anino lang kini sa katoyuan sa Ginoo nga mao pag-ula sa dugo sa Iyang anak. Masabtan lang nato nga kining tanan gilaraw na sa Ginoo, sa wala pa matukod ang kalibutan, aron madayag ang Iyang GUGMA.

1 Peter 1:19-20. "But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you."

Ang Ginoo magpanalangin kanatong tanan!

Sure sir puede ka mutubag. Salamat sa bersikulo sir.

Mao lagi ni akong ponto nga ang Ginoo matud pa sa bersikulo nanginahanglan ug dugo harun kita mapasaylo kay kung walay dugo walay paglimpyo sa sala. Busa maka ingun ta nga mas gamhanan pa ang dugo kaysa ginoo ug DEPENDENT ang kaluwasan sa dugo ug dili sa ginoo.

Unya nagpamatood pod ning bersikuloha nga kining Diyos nga gihisgutan diri osa ka diyos nga BLOOD-THIRSTY kay tiaw mo ng dugo ra ang makapa SATISFY kaniya harun siya makapasaylo sa atong sala.


Actually bro wala koy problema ana kung mao nay imyong pagtoo, ang akong ponto lang kay kining konseptoha sa pag appease sa osa ka ginoo pinaagi sa dugo osa ka konsepto nga gikan sa mga pagano.

[bahiista]

@bahiista

thanks for your explanation, but i'm not quite convince, can you explain, why god gave us something like free will that could make us go against him; and has a potential to damage us. if your answer is because he loves us, then love must be craze

@Mr.Ho_chai

this statement keep me thinking ... GOD allows it but approving it is entirely a different story ... thanks

i just hope god will use all his power to make our will his will

bro nahan gyud ta ko mutubag anang imo inquiry but i dont think i have enough knowledge... But i know that it's His business to give us such freedom of our will. You should ask someone about your concern and this is not the right place for you to ask, maglibog lang ka dri bro...

tanawa they're arguing about blood thing... for me, those are part of the old testament sacrifices.. the time Jesus Christ died and rose from dead, it was very different but they are still pushing things that they're not even sure. only their pride is really driving them. We are suppose to be hanged on that cross or whatever process we may call it as long as it is painful to us to the point of death. we should be the one suffering and not Jesus Christ, and now they're arguing as if they knew the very mind of God..

[Reason2believe]

bro nahan gyud ta ko mutubag anang imo inquiry but i dont think i have enough knowledge... But i know that it's His business to give us such freedom of our will. You should ask someone about your concern and this is not the right place for you to ask, maglibog lang ka dri bro...

tanawa they're arguing about blood thing... for me, those are part of the old testament sacrifices.. the time Jesus Christ died and rose from dead, it was very different but they are still pushing things that they're not even sure. only their pride is really driving them. We are suppose to be hanged on that cross or whatever process we may call it as long as it is painful to us to the point of death. we should be the one suffering and not Jesus Christ, and now they're arguing as if they knew the very mind of God..

Perhaps you know the mind of god sir.

[FISHPEN]

You know what Reason2believe. 1. You Keep in using Timeline as one of the basis of your arguement but have you notice? even the time line that you are using is based on the Death of our Savior Jesus Christ? Like A.D and B.C. thing? Like one 1million BC and 600 AD? even scientist is using that timeline.

2. You said that paganism started in the time of moses.. How about the shedding of blood in Cain and abel story? that happend before moses, what do you call that nothing? it means to say that religion is already present but they don't have name. But they know God for sure and I'm sure with that.

[Mr.Ho_chia]

I said the nuetral side w/n the scientific community have weight all the pros n cons of the evidences brought by the oppossing side and have come up a decision to reject creation science. To question the decision and accused them of other things like what you are suggesting(majority wins) is kinda irresponsible act on your part. Why? because you are questioning their expertise w/c is the product of lots of years of training and experience and putting their integrity into a shady area w/c you have no access.


We both base our timeline on faith? says who? Creation Scientists,right? Sorry sir but as ive said non-creationsit timeline is more reliable by virtue of scientific experimetation and experience. Unless their(creationist) timeline gets into mainstream science, my position remains the same.

okay you are right based on Creation timeline w/c by the way a timeline rejected by mainsteam science. Isnt it confusing that when certain sects in christianity gives a certain interpretation of a doctrine is being rejected for reason that it does not agree with mainstream denomination but when it comes to REAL science these same people would push the idea that its okay to entertain an idea rejected by what we call the mainstream body.

Sure i am not looking at the god of the bible because to me God is not a blood-thirsty god


The Partriarchs were not jewish thats what i said. Correct, Abraham was the Father of the Jewish nation But he wasnt jewish. If you can prove in the bible that Abraham was there during the formation of judaism then i will accept that i am wrong.


Well sir fortunately i am basing my conclusion that paganism came before judasm from real historians not from a religoius book. Did you missed what i posted previously where i said that The worship of the golden calf is an affirmation that pagansim came before judaism?

again this event(golden calf) boosted my confidence to believe that pagansim came before judaism.


Correct, that if God starts to think like human being then he ceased to be god,thats why i cant accept trhe idea that he needs blood for His justice to be satisifed because i see people doing just that. funny point!

This is not to appease god,shedding of blood is not to appease god? wow,you are flagrantly violating a Major Doctrine of christianity. Review your systematic theology sir,if you have never taken this course i suggest to take one,its not yet too late. By the way orthodox christianity has a name for someone who violates any major doctrine of christianity,its Apostasy.


i dont have a box here sir that fits God,the bible surely looks like a box.

pls answer my question..."Does God have a blood?"

In rejecting something in the absence of absolute evidence is made by votes depending on the degree of that evidence based on who view them, that is not an irresponsible act at all but of truth and practice. Rejecting one thing and embracing another one does not define the truth but rather it define the leaning one has. Questioning one expertise based on a reasonable argument is not irresponsible, a lot of these so called learned people who studied everything all there lives change their views over night, we are humans and we do change our mind. THis is why democracy is great, we don't swallow what people shove down our truth, we think and clarify, we ask them to resolve issues that are important and seek absolute evidence before we make life changing decisions. I am not gonna follow someone blindly just because he has a phd, md, eed attached to his name, he is as fallible as I am. shaddy area like the earth is millions of years old? i have no access to it and therefore we nod every time they stroke their hand?

sorry I have access to information some of which i have posted already and to add to that, did you know that the earth spinning is slowed down each year? for the earth to be millions of years old the spinning should be really crazy fast that before you sleep it's morning already, I doubt if we can even stand up at all.
where they able to answer such a valid argument? of course not, because, we just have to swallow what they shove down our truth, is that what we want? Definitely not!

really more reliable because of experimentation? kindly post those experiments and experiences sir, not that we don't trust you, I just want to exam the integrity of that experiment/s you are talking about. Show also the mathematical computations regarding earth spinning and the furthering away of the moon, let's see that. both creationist and evolutionist are not empirical science, that's why we have to make a choice and believe as we see evidences, and to a certain extent faith is there.

YOup, mainstream science and scientist reject creation time line I agree, but look at these scientist behind them, most of them are atheist, they don;t believe in GOD, so to accept the creation time line is a mockery to their character, therefore it would be better to mock GOD than themselves. Rejecting interpretations is not new, it is neither exclusive to the christian belief, it is as well evident in business, marketing, politics and even science. funny how you zeroed it in to christianity sir.


Surely your not, otherwise you would see that the GOD of the Bible is not a blood thirsty god but a Holy and JUST one who is willing to pay for yours, mine and our sins.

Whether Abraham is Jewish or not (I know he is, by virtue of their linage traceable in scriptures) is irrelevant, what I am trying to say is that From the time of creation GOD is there already, and is worshiped by different people from adam downwards, that each time in the recorded history of the Bible, GOD raise a person for HIS name sake. True there are idols and pagan worshipers your golden calfs came in much later, in the time of Moses the egyptians but remember the shedding of the innocent blood came much earlier in the garden of eden. remember?

we might be talking of the same thing yet misunderstood each other big time. I am not suggesting that we need to shed our blood anymore, that we people have to shed our blood in the payment for our sins. THat is no longer necessary sir. GOD did that already. that is why there is no need to hurt ourselves and shed our own blood to achieve salvation, GOD did it already.

I still maintain that My GOD whom I serve is not appeased by the shedding of Blood, HE is a Holy and Just GOD, HE SHED HIS OWN BLOOD not to appease HIMSELF but for the payment of our sin, more like buying ourselves ones again from the enemy.

Knowing GOD and desiring HIS nature and character is learning thru scriptures, otherwise each one will have their own concept and own image of GOD through our own humanistic view which is highly dangerous and misleading. Read your Bible and see how awesome GOD is.

I answered you already, JESUS CHRIST has blood, He shed them in the cross of calvery, HE is my GOD. Have a nice day sir.

[akosabni]

@bahiista

thanks for your honesty, and your right, madugo na discussion ... padaplin sa ko