T D Jakes Net Worth $140 Million

[ding]

Then how do you explain the account of Genesis being recorded as symbols in the Chinese language 4,500 years ago?

I know you ding tried to post about that once but your thread was so long and a rant that it was impossible for me to follow.

Give me some internet links so I can look at it myself.

Thanks.

Look it up yourself. I don't care if you remain ignorant of it.

 

[Joy4Uall]

I'm glad I'm a Scientific Humanist - more accepting and loving. If we were in god/Jesus' shoes we'd of course have come down in the last 2000 years to educate people, educate them ENOUGH that they wouldn't, say, approve of "murdering their children if they marry outside of their religion,"

Trust me, you Joy4Uall will never be in Jesus' or God's shoes.

I'll tell you that much guaranteed.

It's a hypothetical exercise in morality/compassion: yiostheoy, if YOU were (yes, very hypothetically) in god/Jesus' shoes, would YOU have come down in the last 2000 years to educate people, educate them ENOUGH that they wouldn't, say, approve of "murdering their children if they marry outside of their religion," nearly as much as they do?

Scientific Humanists generally would. How about you, mi amigo?

 

[yiostheoy]

If only Jesus were actually real (and all-powerful, and all-loving as advertised), then of course he'd be caring and powerful enough to have told us in the last 2000 years, with a court-room level of evidence of course, which religion (Catholicism, Protestantism, etc.) is the one true religion - since obviously one or both of them are wrong since they often say contradictory things.

We'd do that because we believe "love people, equally".

Well if you have never met Jesus face to face then you cannot know if He is real or not.

And to assume either way is a fallacy of argument from ignorance.

In the meantime ignorance gives you the freedom to do whatever you please without fearing the consequences of Jesus.

In order to hedge your bets I always strongly suggest everyone read Chapter 25 of Matthew were Jesus explains WHO exactly gets to go to heaven.

It is just like St. James says -- you need good works.

It is unlike what St. Paul has been interpreted by many Protestants to have said -- that you do not.

 

[yiostheoy]

Then how do you explain the account of Genesis being recorded as symbols in the Chinese language 4,500 years ago?

I know you ding tried to post about that once but your thread was so long and a rant that it was impossible for me to follow.

Give me some internet links so I can look at it myself.

Thanks.

Look it up yourself. I don't care if you remain ignorant of it.

Well then you have violated the fallacy again of shifting the burden.

That's why you are on my iggy list -- your many rants, much spam, and violations of fallacies:
List of fallacies - Wikipedia

 

[Joy4Uall]

I'm glad I'm a Scientific Humanist - more accepting and loving. If we were in god/Jesus' shoes we'd of course have come down in the last 2000 years to educate people, educate them ENOUGH that they wouldn't, say, approve of "murdering their children if they marry outside of their religion,"

Trust me, you Joy4Uall will never be in Jesus' or God's shoes.

I'll tell you that much guaranteed.

But if god/Jesus are simply not real (and no court-room level of evidence exists that they are real), then we humans would indeed be the highest intellectual source in the known universe, so we kinda are, effectively, in god/Jesus' shoes, one could argue.

 

[yiostheoy]

It's a hypothetical exercise in morality/compassion: yiostheoy, if YOU were (yes, very hypothetically) in god/Jesus' shoes, would YOU have come down in the last 2000 years to educate people, educate them ENOUGH that they wouldn't, say, approve of "murdering their children if they marry outside of their religion," nearly as much as they do?

Scientific Humanists generally would. How about you, mi amigo?

I am not God.

I am not Jesus.

I am not the Holy Spirit.

I am not Lucifer.

I am not Adolf.

I am not Napoleon.

I am not Caesar.

I do not have schizophrenia.

We are all sons of God though. At least that's what Jesus taught.

 

[Joy4Uall]

Jesus approved of Adam/Eve in the NT and never condemned that story, and being "all-knowing" over the last 2000 years he obviously approves of the Bible or else he'd have told humanity that it (and the talking snake, etc.) are false (he's the main hero in that book, so he has a moral obligation to tell us if it were false), or he simply doesn't care about us, or he's not actually real....one of those 3 choices.

We do like the Golden Rule, however, just not Jesus' magic stuff, since it's obviously unscientific. Also, "Original sin" is not something that we can bring forward, because it's not what's best for the world because of course it effectively serves to reduce people's self-image. Also the verse right before the golden rule says that we are all "evil" or "wicked", depending upon the translation (from bible.cc wed site parallel bible translations.)

So you don't have a cite.

I thought not.

Jesus does not refer to any talking snakes.

Talking pigs, yes.

Talking snakes, no.

I've seen some of those talking 'pigs'. They are easy to spot most of the time.

He did approve of Adam/Eve in the NT, and didn't say they were not true, so was Jesus too dumb to know about the talking snake that is such a big part of said Adam/Eve story?....I would think NOT, so therefore Jesus approved of the talking snake, one has to conclude. It's like: "I know about Tom Brady, but I don't know about the New England Patriots"....not too realistic.

 

[Joy4Uall]

It's a hypothetical exercise in morality/compassion: yiostheoy, if YOU were (yes, very hypothetically) in god/Jesus' shoes, would YOU have come down in the last 2000 years to educate people, educate them ENOUGH that they wouldn't, say, approve of "murdering their children if they marry outside of their religion," nearly as much as they do?

Scientific Humanists generally would. How about you, mi amigo?

I am not God.

I am not Jesus.

I am not the Holy Spirit.

I am not Lucifer.

I am not Adolf.

I am not Napoleon.

I am not Caesar.

I do not have schizophrenia.

We are all sons of God though. At least that's what Jesus taught.

Since you can be more ethical/caring than even Jesus, perhaps Jesus is not real.

 

[ding]

Then how do you explain the account of Genesis being recorded as symbols in the Chinese language 4,500 years ago?

I know you ding tried to post about that once but your thread was so long and a rant that it was impossible for me to follow.

Give me some internet links so I can look at it myself.

Thanks.

Look it up yourself. I don't care if you remain ignorant of it.

Well then you have violated the fallacy again of shifting the burden.

That's why you are on my iggy list -- your many rants, much spam, and violations of fallacies:
List of fallacies - Wikipedia

Ummmm... no, I created a thread on this. It's still out there. You already dismissed it. It would be illogical for me to re-hash your ignorance.

 

[yiostheoy]

I'm glad I'm a Scientific Humanist - more accepting and loving. If we were in god/Jesus' shoes we'd of course have come down in the last 2000 years to educate people, educate them ENOUGH that they wouldn't, say, approve of "murdering their children if they marry outside of their religion,"

Trust me, you Joy4Uall will never be in Jesus' or God's shoes.

I'll tell you that much guaranteed.

But if god/Jesus are simply not real (and no court-room level of evidence exists that they are real), then we humans would indeed be the highest intellectual source in the known universe, so we kinda are, effectively, in god/Jesus' shoes, one could argue.

To my mind, Constantine The Great is amply evidence that Jesus exists and spoke to Constantine the same way He spoke to St. Paul.

I have no doubt of it.

This single evidence is sufficient for me.

Anyone who believes otherwise is entitled to their own beliefs and the freedom to exercise them, but in my mind that does not change the reality of it.

 

[Joy4Uall]

Jesus approved of Adam/Eve in the NT and never condemned that story, and being "all-knowing" over the last 2000 years he obviously approves of the Bible or else he'd have told humanity that it (and the talking snake, etc.) are false (he's the main hero in that book, so he has a moral obligation to tell us if it were false), or he simply doesn't care about us, or he's not actually real....one of those 3 choices.

We do like the Golden Rule, however, just not Jesus' magic stuff, since it's obviously unscientific. Also, "Original sin" is not something that we can bring forward, because it's not what's best for the world because of course it effectively serves to reduce people's self-image. Also the verse right before the golden rule says that we are all "evil" or "wicked", depending upon the translation (from bible.cc wed site parallel bible translations.)

So you don't have a cite.

I thought not.

Jesus does not refer to any talking snakes.

Talking pigs, yes.

Talking snakes, no.

Chapter/verse on said talking pigs?

 

[yiostheoy]

Then how do you explain the account of Genesis being recorded as symbols in the Chinese language 4,500 years ago?

I know you ding tried to post about that once but your thread was so long and a rant that it was impossible for me to follow.

Give me some internet links so I can look at it myself.

Thanks.

Look it up yourself. I don't care if you remain ignorant of it.

Well then you have violated the fallacy again of shifting the burden.

That's why you are on my iggy list -- your many rants, much spam, and violations of fallacies:
List of fallacies - Wikipedia

Ummmm... no, I created a thread on this. It's still out there. You already dismissed it. It would be illogical for me to re-hash your ignorance.

You brought it up ding .

So you at lease owe me a link to your thread then.

Q.E.D.

 

[yiostheoy]

Chapter/verse on said talking pigs?

Ok sorry ... it was not the pigs that were talking ... it was the lunatic.

Then the demons were sent into the herd of pigs.

My mistake.

 

[RodISHI]

Jesus approved of Adam/Eve in the NT and never condemned that story, and being "all-knowing" over the last 2000 years he obviously approves of the Bible or else he'd have told humanity that it (and the talking snake, etc.) are false (he's the main hero in that book, so he has a moral obligation to tell us if it were false), or he simply doesn't care about us, or he's not actually real....one of those 3 choices.

We do like the Golden Rule, however, just not Jesus' magic stuff, since it's obviously unscientific. Also, "Original sin" is not something that we can bring forward, because it's not what's best for the world because of course it effectively serves to reduce people's self-image. Also the verse right before the golden rule says that we are all "evil" or "wicked", depending upon the translation (from bible.cc wed site parallel bible translations.)

So you don't have a cite.

I thought not.

Jesus does not refer to any talking snakes.

Talking pigs, yes.

Talking snakes, no.

I've seen some of those talking 'pigs'. They are easy to spot most of the time.

He did approve of Adam/Eve in the NT, and didn't say they were not true, so was Jesus too dumb to know about the talking snake that is such a big part of said Adam/Eve story?....I would think NOT, so therefore Jesus approved of the talking snake, one has to conclude. It's like: "I know about Tom Brady, but I don't know about the New England Patriots"....not too realistic.

The word for 'snake' is actual a word that describes 'looking intently' or 'gazing'. Adam is 'human, more specifically a red earth human'. Eve is 'life, that spirit in the conscience that teaches the human how to breath'.

 

[Joy4Uall]

Jesus approved of Adam/Eve in the NT and never condemned that story, and being "all-knowing" over the last 2000 years he obviously approves of the Bible or else he'd have told humanity that it (and the talking snake, etc.) are false (he's the main hero in that book, so he has a moral obligation to tell us if it were false), or he simply doesn't care about us, or he's not actually real....one of those 3 choices.

We do like the Golden Rule, however, just not Jesus' magic stuff, since it's obviously unscientific. Also, "Original sin" is not something that we can bring forward, because it's not what's best for the world because of course it effectively serves to reduce people's self-image. Also the verse right before the golden rule says that we are all "evil" or "wicked", depending upon the translation (from bible.cc wed site parallel bible translations.)

So you don't have a cite.

I thought not.

Jesus does not refer to any talking snakes.

Talking pigs, yes.

Talking snakes, no.

I'm glad I'm a Scientific Humanist - more accepting and loving. If we were in god/Jesus' shoes we'd of course have come down in the last 2000 years to educate people, educate them ENOUGH that they wouldn't, say, approve of "murdering their children if they marry outside of their religion,"

Trust me, you Joy4Uall will never be in Jesus' or God's shoes.

I'll tell you that much guaranteed.

But if god/Jesus are simply not real (and no court-room level of evidence exists that they are real), then we humans would indeed be the highest intellectual source in the known universe, so we kinda are, effectively, in god/Jesus' shoes, one could argue.

To my mind, Constantine The Great is amply evidence that Jesus exists and spoke to Constantine the same way He spoke to St. Paul.

I have no doubt of it.

This single evidence is sufficient for me.

Anyone who believes otherwise is entitled to their own beliefs and the freedom to exercise them, but in my mind that does not change the reality of it.

Jesus might have EXISTED, but that certainly does not mean that the hearsay about his magic/divinity has any truth to it, nor that their is a magic invisible Hindu-free place up in the sky that you'll magically go if you simply "believe" in a 2000 year-old dead guy, one can argue.
Besides, their is no more evidence for this divinity than the divinity of any other of the 5000+ claimed gods throughout history. Paul just expanded on a myth - so try to ease people's thanatophobia.

 

[yiostheoy]

Since you can be more ethical/caring than even Jesus, perhaps Jesus is not real.

I am certainly NOT more ethical and caring than Jesus was/is/will be.

Where did you get that idea from ???

 

[Joy4Uall]

Jesus approved of Adam/Eve in the NT and never condemned that story, and being "all-knowing" over the last 2000 years he obviously approves of the Bible or else he'd have told humanity that it (and the talking snake, etc.) are false (he's the main hero in that book, so he has a moral obligation to tell us if it were false), or he simply doesn't care about us, or he's not actually real....one of those 3 choices.

We do like the Golden Rule, however, just not Jesus' magic stuff, since it's obviously unscientific. Also, "Original sin" is not something that we can bring forward, because it's not what's best for the world because of course it effectively serves to reduce people's self-image. Also the verse right before the golden rule says that we are all "evil" or "wicked", depending upon the translation (from bible.cc wed site parallel bible translations.)

So you don't have a cite.

I thought not.

Jesus does not refer to any talking snakes.

Talking pigs, yes.

Talking snakes, no.

I've seen some of those talking 'pigs'. They are easy to spot most of the time.

He did approve of Adam/Eve in the NT, and didn't say they were not true, so was Jesus too dumb to know about the talking snake that is such a big part of said Adam/Eve story?....I would think NOT, so therefore Jesus approved of the talking snake, one has to conclude. It's like: "I know about Tom Brady, but I don't know about the New England Patriots"....not too realistic.

The word for 'snake' is actual a word that describes 'looking intently' or 'gazing'. Adam is 'human, more specifically a red earth human'. Eve is 'life, that spirit in the conscience that teaches the human how to breath'.

So if it's just metaphorical/symbolic (etc.) in nature, then SO IS the interesting metaphor for rebirth in the Bible (the dead guy from Nazareth coming back to life to give you eternal life up in heaven)....correct? Intellectual consistency would require you to apply the same standard to both of them.

 

[RodISHI]

Jesus approved of Adam/Eve in the NT and never condemned that story, and being "all-knowing" over the last 2000 years he obviously approves of the Bible or else he'd have told humanity that it (and the talking snake, etc.) are false (he's the main hero in that book, so he has a moral obligation to tell us if it were false), or he simply doesn't care about us, or he's not actually real....one of those 3 choices.

We do like the Golden Rule, however, just not Jesus' magic stuff, since it's obviously unscientific. Also, "Original sin" is not something that we can bring forward, because it's not what's best for the world because of course it effectively serves to reduce people's self-image. Also the verse right before the golden rule says that we are all "evil" or "wicked", depending upon the translation (from bible.cc wed site parallel bible translations.)

So you don't have a cite.

I thought not.

Jesus does not refer to any talking snakes.

Talking pigs, yes.

Talking snakes, no.

I'm glad I'm a Scientific Humanist - more accepting and loving. If we were in god/Jesus' shoes we'd of course have come down in the last 2000 years to educate people, educate them ENOUGH that they wouldn't, say, approve of "murdering their children if they marry outside of their religion,"

Trust me, you Joy4Uall will never be in Jesus' or God's shoes.

I'll tell you that much guaranteed.

But if god/Jesus are simply not real (and no court-room level of evidence exists that they are real), then we humans would indeed be the highest intellectual source in the known universe, so we kinda are, effectively, in god/Jesus' shoes, one could argue.

To my mind, Constantine The Great is amply evidence that Jesus exists and spoke to Constantine the same way He spoke to St. Paul.

I have no doubt of it.

This single evidence is sufficient for me.

Anyone who believes otherwise is entitled to their own beliefs and the freedom to exercise them, but in my mind that does not change the reality of it.

Jesus might have EXISTED, but that certainly does not mean that the hearsay about his magic/divinity has any truth to it, nor that their is a magic invisible Hindu-free place up in the sky that you'll magically go if you simply "believe" in a 2000 year-old dead guy, one can argue.
Besides, their is no more evidence for this divinity than the divinity of any other of the 5000+ claimed gods throughout history. Paul just expanded on a myth - so try to ease people's thanatophobia.

now I am sure there are better historians than me on here but didn't the Egyptians and Babylonians have a sky god? I think of that whenever I here preachers teach about the kingdom being a distance place. Not to say that there are not different levels of heaven as there is but best for humans to get that part in them first figured out.

 

[yiostheoy]

Jesus might have EXISTED, but that certainly does not mean that the hearsay about his magic/divinity has any truth to it, nor that their is a magic invisible Hindu-free place up in the sky that you'll magically go if you simply "believe" in a 2000 year-old dead guy, one can argue.
Besides, their is no more evidence for this divinity than the divinity of any other of the 5000+ claimed gods throughout history. Paul just expanded on a myth - so try to ease people's thanatophobia.

I try to explain to people that mastering Philosophy is the first step in understanding ourselves and the world and Earth around us.

Once you reach the limits of Philosophy then you are logically forced to explore Science.

Once you reach the limits of both Philosophy and Science then you must choose from the following:

1 - to pick a religion and become a Theist.

2 - to avoid organized religion and become a Deist.

3 - to refrain from making a choice and become an Agnostic.

4 - to fight against God and become an Atheist.

I have chosen #2 after many years in the Catholic Church.

However I still go to Mass twice at Easter and once at Christmas.

 

[Joy4Uall]

Since you can be more ethical/caring than even Jesus, perhaps Jesus is not real.

I am certainly NOT more ethical and caring than Jesus was/is/will be.

Where did you get that idea from ???

Easy, there are hundreds of reasons that I could give you: here's just one: yiostheoy, if it was up to YOU, would you let Einstein into heaven (assuming that not only did he help the world a ton, but that we was reasonable ethical) and avoid hell? If "yes", then you are more compassionate, more tolerant, more loving, than even someone as great as Jesus. I believe in you, and am confident that you can answer "yes" like Scientific Humanists do.

Have a great night.