Bad Mouth My Apostle

a reply to: coomba98

You saying Gods a liar Padawan?'

Who is Padawan?

At any rate, I'll say it! Whoever wrote the book of ACTS is a liar! I don't believe a word of it!

a reply to: windword

By windword:
Who is Padawan?

Padawan is the multi-national, unknown to each other, plus 30 banned account user. Ive known him since Gnosisfaith.

He who makes the same old stupid threads that don't make sense but to Padawan.

By windword:
At any rate, I'll say it! Whoever wrote the book of ACTS is a liar! I don't believe a word of it!

Fair enough. But why?

Coomba98

a reply to: coomba98

Fair enough. But why?

Because, The Acts of the Apostles is most likely a bastardized plagiarization of Plutarch's "Parallel Lives".

Parallel Lives

FORGED – WRITING IN THE NAME OF GOD–WHY THE BIBLE’S AUTHORS ARE NOT WHO WE THINK THEY ARE

ETA:

Padawan is the multi-national, unknown to each other, plus 30 banned account user. Ive known him since Gnosisfaith.

It's a shame that this member has ruined his ATS chances, at least for now, because of his multiple accounts, which is a violation of ATS T&Cs, because I find his threads fascinating!

originally posted by: ElementalFreeze
a reply to: newnature1

You seem to be a trained professional in the field of using a ton of words and never making a specific point or relevant (to anything) statement. I don't know how you do it, it's almost as if you are a random 3 word phrase generator programmed to fill up space with words.

So if you are actually a fan of Paul you not doing his way any favors. You probably will turn more people away from Paul.

Paul is an absolute dirtbag who just happens to have fans because those people don't really think about it. Asking someone to believe in virgin births and ressurections is fine if you ask me, not true but harmless because the man known as Jesus had a solid message that is kept alive by his mythological characteristics.

But the words of Paul, like it or not contradict the words of Jesus. Their individual teachings are so different in a pretty subtle (if you don't know the whole story) way that only if you read it in its entirety do you realize it.

But people are figuring it out by using their own intellect and I am amazed at the number of people who have done what I thought hardly ever happened, figuring out that Paul is not an apostle, and even in the world of biblical myths his story is unbelievable under scrutiny(by the rules of and in the bible itself).

The history of Genesis chapter three is intended to teach us the fact that Satan’s sphere of activities is in the religious sphere, and not the spheres of crime or immorality; that his battlefield is not the sins arising from human depravity, but the unbelief of the human heart. We are not to look for Satan’s activities today in the newspaper press, or the police courts; but in the pulpit, and in professors’ chairs. Whenever the Word of God is called in question, there we see the trail of that old serpent? You can grow the good stuff with Paul's bag of dirt, come plant your seeds with Paul.

originally posted by: newnature1
................................

The history of Genesis chapter three is intended to teach us the fact that Satan’s sphere of activities is in the religious sphere,.........

Yes this is correct because satan is the adversary.A satan is the religious sate of mind that believes it knows the creator God because that state of mind is an adversary to the truth.It is this state of mind that causes mankind to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge good and evil and be deceived by their Belief System religion.There is no such being/entity as Satan which is only a creation of a satan state of mind.

originally posted by: newnature1

originally posted by: ElementalFreeze
a reply to: newnature1

You seem to be a trained professional in the field of using a ton of words and never making a specific point or relevant (to anything) statement. I don't know how you do it, it's almost as if you are a random 3 word phrase generator programmed to fill up space with words.

So if you are actually a fan of Paul you not doing his way any favors. You probably will turn more people away from Paul.

Paul is an absolute dirtbag who just happens to have fans because those people don't really think about it. Asking someone to believe in virgin births and ressurections is fine if you ask me, not true but harmless because the man known as Jesus had a solid message that is kept alive by his mythological characteristics.

But the words of Paul, like it or not contradict the words of Jesus. Their individual teachings are so different in a pretty subtle (if you don't know the whole story) way that only if you read it in its entirety do you realize it.

But people are figuring it out by using their own intellect and I am amazed at the number of people who have done what I thought hardly ever happened, figuring out that Paul is not an apostle, and even in the world of biblical myths his story is unbelievable under scrutiny(by the rules of and in the bible itself).

The history of Genesis chapter three is intended to teach us the fact that Satan’s sphere of activities is in the religious sphere, and not the spheres of crime or immorality; that his battlefield is not the sins arising from human depravity, but the unbelief of the human heart. We are not to look for Satan’s activities today in the newspaper press, or the police courts; but in the pulpit, and in professors’ chairs. Whenever the Word of God is called in question, there we see the trail of that old serpent? You can grow the good stuff with Paul's bag of dirt, come plant your seeds with Paul.

Satan is not mentioned once in Genesis. The serpent was punished with a finality that would have rendered it incapable of speech and made a regular beast.

Then, what, do you think the serpent usurped Gods will and reversed the curse and became Ha Satan or The Adversary and a member of the divine council to boot?(see Job)

Illogical. I don't care what you say, that serpent is NOT Satan and the book of Revelation says that serpent of old called Satan and the devil because he is CALLED that. But he is only called that, he isn't that.

It's impossible, that serpent in Eden was forever cursed by God.

Satan in Job is a member of the divine council. That's a lot different than being the serpent of Genesis. Quite a difference in the two DIFFERENT characters as Satan in Job is under the command of God and no rebel angel. No adversary of God, just mankind.

Get this. The cursed serpent of Genesis is symbolic of the demise of serpent worship which was the dominant religion in the most ancient of times. Jews never associated the serpent with the Satan and no serious Christian does either.

Just the ones who believe in myths that are tradition but also false.

originally posted by: ElementalFreeze

originally posted by: newnature1

originally posted by: ElementalFreeze
a reply to: newnature1

You seem to be a trained professional in the field of using a ton of words and never making a specific point or relevant (to anything) statement. I don't know how you do it, it's almost as if you are a random 3 word phrase generator programmed to fill up space with words.

So if you are actually a fan of Paul you not doing his way any favors. You probably will turn more people away from Paul.

Paul is an absolute dirtbag who just happens to have fans because those people don't really think about it. Asking someone to believe in virgin births and ressurections is fine if you ask me, not true but harmless because the man known as Jesus had a solid message that is kept alive by his mythological characteristics.

But the words of Paul, like it or not contradict the words of Jesus. Their individual teachings are so different in a pretty subtle (if you don't know the whole story) way that only if you read it in its entirety do you realize it.

But people are figuring it out by using their own intellect and I am amazed at the number of people who have done what I thought hardly ever happened, figuring out that Paul is not an apostle, and even in the world of biblical myths his story is unbelievable under scrutiny(by the rules of and in the bible itself).

The history of Genesis chapter three is intended to teach us the fact that Satan’s sphere of activities is in the religious sphere, and not the spheres of crime or immorality; that his battlefield is not the sins arising from human depravity, but the unbelief of the human heart. We are not to look for Satan’s activities today in the newspaper press, or the police courts; but in the pulpit, and in professors’ chairs. Whenever the Word of God is called in question, there we see the trail of that old serpent? You can grow the good stuff with Paul's bag of dirt, come plant your seeds with Paul.

Satan is not mentioned once in Genesis. The serpent was punished with a finality that would have rendered it incapable of speech and made a regular beast.

Then, what, do you think the serpent usurped Gods will and reversed the curse and became Ha Satan or The Adversary and a member of the divine council to boot?(see Job)

Illogical. I don't care what you say, that serpent is NOT Satan and the book of Revelation says that serpent of old called Satan and the devil because he is CALLED that. But he is only called that, he isn't that.

It's impossible, that serpent in Eden was forever cursed by God.

Satan in Job is a member of the divine council. That's a lot different than being the serpent of Genesis. Quite a difference in the two DIFFERENT characters as Satan in Job is under the command of God and no rebel angel. No adversary of God, just mankind.

Get this. The cursed serpent of Genesis is symbolic of the demise of serpent worship which was the dominant religion in the most ancient of times. Jews never associated the serpent with the Satan and no serious Christian does either.

Just the ones who believe in myths that are tradition but also false.

Let’s look at the beginning of Genesis, “And” is the figure of speech Polysyndeton or Many Ands. The repetition of the word “and” at the beginning of successive clauses, each independent, important, and emphatic, with no climax at the end. 34 verses of this introduction, each one of 102 separate acts is emphasized; and the important word “God” in versus 1 is carried like a lamp through the whole of this Introduction.

“The earth” is the figure of speech Anadiplosis or Like sentence endings and beginnings. The word or words concluding one sentence are repeated at the beginning of another.

“Without form” the Hebrew word is ‘tohu va bohu’ and is the figure of speech Paronomasia or Rhyming words. The repetition of words similar in sound, but not necessarily in sense. Without form, one of the Hebrew words is ‘tohu’ and is used as a subsequent event. Not created ‘tohu’ (Isa. 45:18), but became ‘tohu’ (2 Pet. 3:5-6). The other word is ‘bohu’ and is rendered “void”, means desolate. The two words together occur in Gen. 1:2; Isa. 34:11; Jer. 4:23.

“Face” in Genesis 1:2 is the figure Pleonasm or Redundancy. Where what is said is, immediately after, put in another or opposite way to make it impossible for the sense to be missed.

In Genesis 1:2, the two verbs ‘was’ should be the verb ‘to become’. The Revisers ill-advisedly decided that “all such words, now printed in italics, as are plainly implied in the Hebrew, and necessary in English, be printed in common type. One of the consequences of this decision is that the verb “to be” is not distinguished from the verb “to become”, so that the lessons conveyed are lost.

Genesis 1:1 shouldn’t have happened. The bible assumes that the great usurper exits and never questions that assumption. The earth flooded out proves the great usurper is not an unfounded assumption. The beginning of the universe is in Genesis 1:1.

Paul understood this, come study Paul before you fall!

a reply to: newnature1


Satan was not mentioned in Genesis, your words don't change that and don't make sense.

You're hedging your bets that Paul knew how to interpret scripture and did so for the benefit of others.

You'll lose.

originally posted by: ElementalFreeze
a reply to: newnature1


Satan was not mentioned in Genesis, your words don't change that and don't make sense.

You're hedging your bets that Paul knew how to interpret scripture and did so for the benefit of others.

You'll lose.

No losers with Paul, we are sealed in the last Adam. But you are standing in your own righteousness, Adam in rebellion. Don't get left behind, hedge your bet with Paul.

originally posted by: newnature1

originally posted by: ElementalFreeze
a reply to: newnature1


Satan was not mentioned in Genesis, your words don't change that and don't make sense.

You're hedging your bets that Paul knew how to interpret scripture and did so for the benefit of others.

You'll lose.

No losers with Paul, we are sealed in the last Adam. But you are standing in your own righteousness, Adam in rebellion. Don't get left behind, hedge your bet with Paul.

Paul IS a loser and I don't bet. But if I did I would bet on the teachings of Jesus and not Paul.

You just haven't figured out yet that he works for Satan in hell now. Even when he was alive he was a devil worshipper.

Paul knew that the defense mechanism resident within the pride nature of the human heart would be instant in it’s response to protest the accusation of wrath worthiness.