Hellenic religion

[Atanasovski]

I dont read the bible everyday, i have not read the bible from cover to cover for a few years, i do sometimes sit and read excertps from it. I do believe in God and I do beleive Jesus Christ as our saviour, but some people take everything too literally, and it pleases me with your reponse that you dont have to preach the bible daily and be a frequent church goer to be a believer.

Bible readers and frequent church goers and are not necessarily believers. Some people will go to church every week and do the dance but have the heart of a devil. But i would expect true beleivers to atleast want to read their bible, pray, have interested in God's will, and a desire to worship.

p.s. The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector - To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable: "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood up and prayed about[a] himself: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.' "But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.' "I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." - Luke 18:9-14

God wants relationship with people, not church going robots that can do the church dance...

Atanosovski, when you say to be saved batko, from what? and for what

Well I'm not sure if you will agree with me on this, but for me it is very simple -

1. I believe God has given us a conscience and by our moral experience we know that at least some things are truly and objectively wrong – rape, torture, molestation, hatred, cruelty etc. These are not merely socially unacceptable behaviour or an expression of personal preference, they’re moral abominations. Similarly, love, generosity, equality, self sacrifice, are really good. You do not have to be a Christian to be convicted by the reality of objective moral law and duties that impose themselves on us.

2. There are none righteous. Even if you have never commited an outward sin, lets face it, we are all blasphemers, liars, adulterers and murderers at heart. We have all turned our backs on God.

3. How could a holy and just God blink at sin and would we reaaaally want God to be that kind of God? A criminal comes to court for his first conviction, assault & theft, he is genuinely ashamed and sorry for what he did. He sobbingly tells the judge "Im so so so sorry, i know im not a bad person and i hate what i did. I just, i just, i will never do it again". The judge has mercy on the man and lets him go unpunished. This is mercy at the expense of Justice. There is mercy in this situation but what about Justice? What about the victim? What if this judge never convicted anyone! He just gives an abundance of mercy to all theives, murderers, rapists... Such a merciful God, but is a purely merciful God really a good God? Deep down we know that their ought to be justice.

4. We have turned away from God. We have sinned against him. A good, holy and just God has to punish sin if he is any good at all. A loving god is full of mercy and forgivness. The judge steps down and pays the sentence in full. Now God can redeem us, he has mercy and at the same time he has satisfied the demands of holyness, justice and righteousness......

[julie]

Cheers Angelovski, Yes, a merciful God is one where one acknowledges , is remorseful for their sin and is forgiven. So compassion goes with that.
We are all sinners per se, but its what we do, how we approach any situation and whether we learn from our errors in judgement.
The person that continuously eschews they are a good Christian because they read the bible is not. Its one where that person practices what he is preaching, that has forgiveness and asks for redemption from a merciful God that is a Christian. Not one that reads their bible daily attends the bricks and mortar church and does the dance as you call it, and then continues to commit the same errors, thinking they will be absolved, being a "Christian" that I find very hypocritical. And the worst of these "Christians" are the ones that cant see that within themselves.

[makedonin]

You contradict yourself in what methodologies should be used in different fields of study and then you claim that one set of evidential principles are valid when you use them but are invalid when someone else uses them.

Dude, I am not here to give you a answears, on the end of the day you are the one preaching to have all the answears by the Book. I am here to show you that you have a belief that is what it is, a belief, and you perpetuate it as the absolute truth!

I don't have to not contradict my self, I learn by doing so, I will change my mind when I see that I have made wrong observation, it happens all the time in normal human life, in a non ABSOLUTIST life.

Your Bible does that all the time, only your compadre Philosopher pulls his "mistical" and "rational" belief out of his ass, when obvious contradiction is there, to justify your ABSOLUTIST view on the world.

Was it there an Angel or were two man, or maybe Jesus were in the Tomb, or was he outside of the Tomb. You can try and pull your "mistical" or "rational" knowledge or belief how much you like, the stories remain contradicting to the Core! The only thing that is not contradicting about them is that they want us believe that Jesus resurrected!

That myth may have even been perpetuated by his beloved Magdalene, cause the whole story has her as the first one who was on the scene! The other just heard and believed!

And you were saying that the Bible does not contradict it self. Only few looks, and it falls apart, but you pull the "mistical" knowledge out to save the day!

By the fact that those Apostels did got saved on base of knowledge, they "eye withnessed" right, your whole perpetuating that "we should believe that he resurrected to be saved" is losing credibility!

To that come another stories that contradict your "believe/save" system:

1It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father's wife. 2And you are proud! Shouldn't you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? 3Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. 4When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature[a] may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%205&version=NIV

What happened to the "don't judge or you will be judged". He clearly said that he judged him already!

Than there is the notion, that the if the Body is destroyed, the sinfull thing, his spirit will be saved on the day of the Lord!

Why, didn't he have to believe in the resurrection?! Where does your "believe/saved" thing fit in here?

And you dare talking about contradiction, while you perpetuate that you know the ABSOLUTE truth!

You, Atanasovski and the Philosopher see your self as very wise man, knowing the Gods word and knowing what God wants.

Here is a another pill for you:

8Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. 19For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%203&version=NIV

You use "logic" and "science" in a way that it is foolishnes in the world of God. How does that fit to your self image? Is the becoming to "fool" accepting the imaginary "mistical" knowledge you perpetuate when interpreting the Bible? Guess yes!

You accept science, but than argue that the earth was created before the Sun and the stars! And you want to see your self as reasonable!

Get real, you are laughable!

[julie]

is there anyone here that can tell me what their views are on a supposed union between Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene and any offspring they may have had?

[Vangelovski]

Bratot,

I have no idea what point you are trying to make about technology.

In relation to the Oath you have taken from the Schedule to the Australian Constitution, that oath is made by newly elected members of the House and Senate. Further, it does not call for these members to worhsip the Queen, rather to pledge their political alleigence to her.

Granted, there are some countries that have laws that are anti-Christian or compel its citizens to disobey God, and in that instance the Bible is clear - you obey God. In addition to his, I would have to question the legitimacy of civil laws that are anti-Christian specifically, or anti-religious generally, in the first place. One example would be some of the laws of Nazi Germany.

SoM,

I consider myself both a Christian and a Macedonian. I do not see a contradiction in the two. It would be like asking you if you are a Carlton or a Ford fan. I think you can quite comfortably be both.

But seeing as you in your original response to your own question set "religion aside", I'm not sure why you even identified a Macedonia "muslim" and a Greek "Christian" in your example and then set "relgion aside" in your own answer. You might have well just asked me about a Macedonian and a Greek.

Makedonin,

I can safely conclude that I don't think anyone knows what you are talking about anymore.

[makedonin]

Makedonin,

I can safely conclude that I don't think anyone knows what you are talking about anymore.

Speak for your self dude! You always make statements like you have so many followers and like-minded! Escaping in the numbers! As usual!

I bet your Philosopher or Atanasovski will jump over and throw some "rational" evidence of the twist and squeeze type!

[Vangelovski]

Speak for your self dude! You always make statements like you have so many followers and like-minded! Escaping in the numbers! As usual!

I bet your Philosopher or Atanasovski will jump over and throw some "rational" evidence of the twist and squeeze type!

Makedonin,

You've made a total mess out of the theories you supposedly subscribe to and you've invented not only contradictory and illogical methodologies and evidential principles, but "facts" to support your dogs breakfast.

[Atanasovski]

is there anyone here that can tell me what their views are on a supposed union between Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene and any offspring they may have had?

I think most scholars would recognize this as fiction.. A myth that has absolutely no basis theologically, historically, or biblically.

If Jesus had been married, the Bible would have told us so, or there would be some unambiguous statement to that fact. Scripture would not be completely silent on such an important issue. The Bible mentions Jesus’ mother, adoptive father, half-brothers, and half-sisters. Why would it neglect to mention the fact that Jesus had a wife?

In reality it is an attack on the Person of Jesus Christ. People do not want to believe that Jesus is God or that He is the Savior, so they make up falsehoods about Him in order to create a false Jesus that they can believe in. They will present a false view of who Jesus Christ truly was and then tell you that this “truth” has been "hidden" for nearly 2000 years.
...http://www.gotquestions.org/was-Jesus-married.html

In Lukes biography of Jesus he writes:

"Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught"

I just think that the best explanation for it not being mentioned by any of the writers is that it didn't happen... Why complicate things beyond the most plausible explanation and be compelled to believe in later inventions..

[Bratot]

Bratot,

I have no idea what point you are trying to make about technology.

Of course you do.

In relation to the Oath you have taken from the Schedule to the Australian Constitution, that oath is made by newly elected members of the House and Senate. Further, it does not call for these members to worhsip the Queen, rather to pledge their political alleigence to her.

You shall not make for yourself any carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them.

Granted, there are some countries that have laws that are anti-Christian or compel its citizens to disobey God, and in that instance the Bible is clear - you obey God. In addition to his, I would have to question the legitimacy of civil laws that are anti-Christian specifically, or anti-religious generally, in the first place. One example would be some of the laws of Nazi Germany.

The State itself endorse laws which are contradicting the coommandements and the State itself represents anti-Christian facility.

That has nothing to do with Nazi Germany, but with many or almost every country in Europe and America.

[julie]

Spolay te for the information Atanasovski.
Its really lovely to be able to have a civil debate with your self, you are not at all a judgemental person

I read somewhere that Mary Magdalene at the time of Jesus crucifixion and resurrection was carrying his child, and fled to France to escape persection and gave birth to a female child
There are some conspiracy theories that the Holy grail is actually not the cup that Jesus drank from in the Last Supper, but the protection of the bloodline of our saviour
It does not make Jesus any less pure if he indeed had fathered a child

I actually have no judgement on any of it, he was the most perfect soul in the universe and there will never be anyone like him.
Vangelovski on one of his many posts mentioned something about Jehovah witness being Christian, he did not discount this'
this is indeed false.
Jehovah witness do not beleive in the Holy Trinity or Jesus Christ as our saviour, nor do they celebrate Christmas. They believe in God, our heavenly father, and discount Jesus as being a healer, prophet and the son of Man as Christians believe

pozz

[Vangelovski]

Of course you do.



You shall not make for yourself any carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them.



The State itself endorse laws which are contradicting the coommandements and the State itself represents anti-Christian facility.

That has nothing to do with Nazi Germany, but with many or almost every country in Europe and America.

Bratot,

The example you provided with the oath taken by Senators and Members of the House is not breaking any commandment. They are pledging political allegiance and service in accordance with the Constitution. Mark 12:17: Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. There’s a huge distinction.

What argument are you trying to make anyway? That the commandments need to change to correspond to civil law or that civil law needs to change to correspond to the commandments?

[makedonin]

Makedonin,

You've made a total mess out of the theories you supposedly subscribe to and you've invented not only contradictory and illogical methodologies and evidential principles, but "facts" to support your dogs breakfast.

What ever you say! One thing I said remains true, your interpretation of the Bible is a mare ferry tail. To understand it like you do, you have to subscribe to some "mistical" knowledge, become a "fool" as St. Paul puts it, and put aside any rationality, but rather subscribe to some "rational belief", what ever that may be!

I, on the contrarry to you, never said that what I see, say or believe is the ABSOLUTE TRUTH.
It might be my dogs breakfast, but that has other reasons than you think. It was unstructured discussion anyways, and one man against three of you believers is time consuming and pain in the but, and certainly each of you tried to pull the discussion into the direction you wanted to. I had to write you esseys or books to just counter your absolutists taste. Ain't gonna happen.

Still some points I made are more than valid and put your motives (or the motives of the authors of the bible) into the light, and surely found many contradictions in the so called non contradicted book! You have posted a tons of so called proof, still could not convince many, if any at all, that there ain't any contradiction there. Taking only the book, and not doing any further explanation to it, brings the book to total contradiction.

You perpetuated the system that "you have to believe in the resurrection of Christ to be saved" (it is the whole base of your belief, if he did not, you wouldn't consider him worthy), and than avoided alltogether the fact that you contradict your self in that, when saying that the apostels were witnesses to his resurrection, which makes them having knowledge instead mare belief about his resurrection. That makes them priveleged compared to any mortal soul on this earth which should believe in their fery tails. Than the 13th desciple even tells us that the body which is sinful should be given to the Satan, so that the soul of the sinner is saved on the day of the Lord. That also contradicts your perpetuated system "believing in christ and you will be saved"!

Bratot makes a point when saying that the Mass Media is having a inpact on the mind and behavor of the modern man. This Media perpetuates many of the so called sins to which the normal man will be seduced or given a justification for deeds that are leading to the sin. Are we supposed to get our eyes out of our scull, cause Jesus said so?
With Gods perfection and omnipotence, he should have known that the technology of this age will have that inpact, so why didn't he do anything about it? Why didn't he somehow forseen that he is pulling us in to the wrong direction? Maybe he wanted us there!

You played the dumb card, saying that you don't understand his assertion. What else could you have done! It does not fit you!


What ever, as osiris said. Discussing religion with religious people is a futile task!

[Bratot]

Bratot,

The example you provided with the oath taken by Senators and Members of the House is not breaking any commandment. They are pledging political allegiance and service in accordance with the Constitution. Mark 12:17: Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. There’s a huge distinction.

What argument are you trying to make anyway? That the commandments need to change to correspond to civil law or that civil law needs to change to correspond to the commandments?

Bratot makes a point when saying that the Mass Media is having a inpact on the mind and behavor of the modern man. This Media perpetuates many of the so called sins to which the normal man will be seduced or given a justification for deeds that are leading to the sin. Are we supposed to get our eyes out of our scull, cause Jesus said so?
With Gods perfection and omnipotence, he should have known that the technology of this age will have that inpact, so why didn't he do anything about it? Why didn't he somehow forseen that he is pulling us in to the wrong direction? Maybe he wanted us there!

You played the dumb card, saying that you don't understand his assertion. What else could you have done! It does not fit you!

I think you have put it as it is so there is no need for further suffocation on this subject.

Vangelovski you live in a legal anti-christian system on a daily basis, your and others interpretations are full of contradictions as you tend being hardcore regilious practicant you should abandon the modern society, all of the legal obligations, all of the temptations surrounding you and to make a foundation of a totally new church according to these commandements but even in that case you will not manage to get out of your subjective interpretations of what you think God is expecting as you proved already that you don't know the fundamental things in your own religion.

[Atanasovski]

Jehovah witness do not beleive in the Holy Trinity or Jesus Christ as our saviour, nor do they celebrate Christmas. They believe in God, our heavenly father, and discount Jesus as being a healer, prophet and the son of Man as Christians believe

Thanks Julie, im also enjoying the civilized chat with you, i hope that i dont offend you in any way in the future and i will respect your beliefs where they differ from mine.

Can i ask, do you personally affirm the doctrine of the trinity and do you believe Jesus is the saviour?

[Atanasovski]

Vangelovski you live in a legal anti-christian system on a daily basis, your and others interpretations are full of contradictions as you tend being hardcore regilious practicant you should abandon the modern society, all of the legal obligations, all of the temptations surrounding you and to make a foundation of a totally new church according to these commandements but even in that case you will not manage to get out of your subjective interpretations of what you think God is expecting as you proved already that you don't know the fundamental things in your own religion.

I can honestly say that i also don't understand what the argument is here. How can you abandon all temptation? What is wrong with being tempted? Why would Vangelovski have to abandon modern society? Arent Christians supposed to be the light of the world and the salt?