Omnipotence of God

Discuss either theological doctrines, ideas about God, or Biblical criticism. I don't want any debates about creation vs evolution.

Moderator:Metacrock

Forum rules
(1) be interesting (2) be nice.
User avatar
Hazard
Posts:61
Joined:Thu Feb 07, 2008 3:08 pm
Re: Omnipotence of God

Post by Hazard » Sun Mar 02, 2008 4:46 pm

2thePoint wrote,
"I am an "out of church" believer. After over 40 years in "the Institution" I left cold-turkey, although I resisted the call for a while. I wrote about it at This Link. My family and I study the Bible at home and invite anyone who wants to come. No hierarchy, pews, altars, pulpits, worship teams, or anything else from ancient Rome and Greece"
.

Thanks mate. I too am not involved in any church what so ever. Left that scene many years ago. Non-denominational, thats me. Follower of Christ to the best of my limited physical ability. Study at home, alone! No one I know in my local is interested. Those that are mostly have an adgender which involves believing their pet theories on most doctrins or leave. Spend spare time on sites such as these till banned for having a say.

Its a pleasure to know you, and unred as well!

Your friend in Jesus,

Haz.

User avatar
2thePoint
Posts:51
Joined:Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:51 pm
Location:Ohio
Contact:

Re: Omnipotence of God

Post by 2thePoint » Sun Mar 02, 2008 5:17 pm

Hazard wrote:Thanks mate. I too am not involved in any church what so ever. Left that scene many years ago. Non-denominational, thats me. Follower of Christ to the best of my limited physical ability. Study at home, alone! No one I know in my local is interested. Those that are mostly have an adgender which involves believing their pet theories on most doctrins or leave. Spend spare time on sites such as these till banned for having a say.

Its a pleasure to know you, and unred as well!

Your friend in Jesus,

Haz.
Ya know, people are going to start thinking I pay you to say nice things to me. :o

I was in a board once that absolutely loathed the idea of not being "covered" by some authority other than the Holy Spirit and the Word, as if these cannot be trusted to do the job alone. You can imagine the names we were called, by people who supposedly were protected from any impure thoughts by their clergy. People scream about the danger of cults and heresy without such hierarchy and control, yet history tells me such institutions are no protection from them at all. There is more danger in a large group controlled by a few men, because all Satan has to do is control the few. That's why, I believe, Jesus never set up a hierarchy or clergy class. "True worshipers worship God in spirit and in truth." (John 4)

And thanks for your "intervention". I'm very glad to meet U 2.
Those who know all the answers haven't heard all the questions.
Image

Theognosis
Posts:94
Joined:Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:30 pm

Re: Omnipotence of God

Post by Theognosis » Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:08 pm

2thePoint wrote:Sorry, theo, you just lost the right to be heard. Continually insulting your opponent is not how to win them over. I'm done trying to communicate with you.
I can assure you that I had no intentions of winning you over. Meta can confirm this. I just felt that it was my responsibility to respond to your attempts at discrediting Holy Orthodoxy in order to promote your personal beliefs.

Forgive me, but my impression after reading all your posts is that you are ignorant of Church history and its faith. Worse, you despise authority so that makes you a rebel at heart. Your agreement with Hazards "scholarship" demonstrates this handicap. As for Hazard, there is no need for me to respond to his post since I happen to own several of its sources as well as Hislop's work and a dozen of comics from Chic Publications (I tell you, in terms of entertainment, I value the series more than Sandman, Sin City and Uncanny X-Men combined).

My challenge for you is to extend your horizons without necessarily giving up what you currently believe in. I think Meta's board is the perfect avenue for this. There are many things you can learn here. I hope you stick around and discover for yourself.

8-)

Theognosis
Posts:94
Joined:Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:30 pm

Re: Omnipotence of God

Post by Theognosis » Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:02 pm

unred typo wrote: Even in the OT when Abraham was living in a pagan nation, with a idol worshipping father, God spoke to Abraham. We have the record of this in the scriptures but does that mean that Abraham was the only person in the entire world that God had any dealings with?When people left off building the tower of babel, they took the knowledge of the one true God with them. Where did that knowledge go and how much of it is still floating around out there in paganland? :? Did he have no other people in any other countries that he spoke to? Does he have no voice today? IOW, is his arm shortened that he cannot save? This interests me because one of the questions we get asked as Christians is “What about those who have never heard?”
There's bad news. According to 2thePoint's sources, they're all going to hell.

http://www.biblehelp.org/qa.htm
Thus, the present day heathen are not the only group of people going to hell even though they have never heard the salvation message. These "Old Testament heathen" also went to hell.

This is an example of self-righteous garbage that has invaded Western Christianity. It is the exact opposite of the Jesus Prayer!

What spirituality!

:o

User avatar
Hazard
Posts:61
Joined:Thu Feb 07, 2008 3:08 pm

Re: Omnipotence of God

Post by Hazard » Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:17 am

Hi theognisis, You sound like a real clever dick. I work with dozens of guys just like you down pit every day for years and years, from Superintendants to Mine Managers, Under Managers, Check Inspectors, to bathhouse attendants. Give you one guess who had the most life savy? I was once just like you are! Please don't ask me what I meant by that statement, or I will have to tell you, and you may not like what I was like.

Theognisis wrote,
"As for Hazard, there is no need for me to respond to his post since I happen to own several of its sources as well as Hislop's work and a dozen of comics from Chic Publications (I tell you, in terms of entertainment, I value the series more than Sandman, Sin City and Uncanny X-Men combined)"
.

Never ever read Hislop, who the hell is he? The barmaid at the pub I drink at after work often call's out in a loud voice; "Yeh, yeh, Its Hislop." I thought she was getting irate because someone spilt their beer all over her bar? Comics from Chick Publications? Never heard of them. Gave up reading comics as a child. Its obvious to me that you don't read what I read, and have read all my life. Since I became a man, I read Playboy, for the articles only, Man Magazine, For the love stories only, Lock Stock and two Smoking Barrels, Car Truck and Bus, Trailer Boat magazine, and the SSAA Sporting Shooters mag. I no longer look at the pictures of naked women in Playboy or Man mag., because the crib rooms down pit are splattered with them, and after eating crib there for over 40 years one becomes immuned to them. When I get the time I read the Bible! Thats where I get my theognism, no where else. Does this make me a theogonist?

Haz.

Theognosis
Posts:94
Joined:Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:30 pm

Re: Omnipotence of God

Post by Theognosis » Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:35 am

Hazard wrote:Never ever read Hislop, who the hell is he?
It's a cult classic. It's called Two Babylons. Every fundy who hates the Catholic Church needs to read that book out loud. You might not have read it directly, but it's very likely that you have already read portions of it since most of the articles on the web use it as primary reference.

Here it is in all its "glory".
http://www.biblebelievers.com/babylon/

If you go back to the post where you mentioned all those things about Nimrod, you will notice similarities as if you have had actually read the book. This is one of the reasons why I had to conclude that your research was based on it. If you could prove otherwise, please show me where you got that information.

:mrgreen:
Comics from Chick Publications? Never heard of them.
I actually said "Chic" Publications, so thank you for the correction. You sure you never heard of 'em? Mmm.

Anyway, like I said, in terms of ENTERTAINMENT value, Chick comics are equivalent to DC and Marvel stuff. In short, they are nothing more than works of fiction. You failed to grasp the whole point as to why I mentioned Chick Publications alongside X-Men, Sandman and all those stuff children read.

:geek:
Gave up reading comics as a child. Its obvious to me that you don't read what I read, and have read all my life.
Can you read between the lines?

:roll:
Since I became a man, I read Playboy, for the articles only, Man Magazine, For the love stories only, Lock Stock and two Smoking Barrels, Car Truck and Bus, Trailer Boat magazine, and the SSAA Sporting Shooters mag. I no longer look at the pictures of naked women in Playboy or Man mag., because the crib rooms down pit are splattered with them, and after eating crib there for over 40 years one becomes immuned to them. When I get the time I read the Bible! Thats where I get my theognism, no where else. Does this make me a theogonist?
Thanks for sharing.

Theognosis
Posts:94
Joined:Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:30 pm

I don't think so...

Post by Theognosis » Mon Mar 03, 2008 5:49 am

Hazard wrote:Never ever read Hislop, who the hell is he?
Are you sure you haven't read Hislop? As in, NEVER EVER?

I really don't think so. 'Cause from the looks of it, you plagiarized portions his work.

Here's my proof.

Hazard's Words (2008)
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=64&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=60
Ironicilly the Roman Church has taken this as her emblem. In 1825 a medal was struck bearing the image of Pope Leo X11 on one side and on the other side Rome symbolized by a woman with a cross in her left hand and a cup in her right hand and a legend around her "Sedet Super Universum"; that is, "The whole world is her seat."
Alexander Hislop's Words (the original, 1853)
http://www.biblebelievers.com/babylon/sect1.htm
...the Roman Church has actually taken this very symbol as her own chosen emblem. In 1825, on occasion of the jubilee, Pope Leo XII struck a medal, bearing on the one side his own image, and on the other, that of the Church of Rome symbolised as a "Woman," holding in her left hand a cross, and in her right a CUP, with the legend around her, "Sedet super universum," "The whole world is her seat."
Honesty is the best policy. And it won't hurt if you would at least acknowledge the work of others.

Sorry, you have to do better than that, my friend.

:cry: :cry: :cry:

Theognosis
Posts:94
Joined:Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:30 pm

Re: Omnipotence of God

Post by Theognosis » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:17 am

Here is Hazard's "original" post.
Hazard wrote:
Theognosis wrote:
I cannot see how any church would be able to discern which pagan concepts are true or not? be they true or lies. What true followers of Christ would even care?
You cannot discount outright everything that is pagan. Afterall, revelation did not begin in the Christian era (although Christianity PERFECTED it). To a Creationist, all can be traced back to the flood. With this in mind, it can be said that the various pagan beliefs are but corrupted forms of the original form of worship. Hence, underneath all the pagan embelishment lies the truth that was revealed to our ancestors.

As far as spirituality is concerned, many in the Bible went to the mountains in order to meditate. To name a few, there's Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, John the Baptist and Jesus Christ himself. What's problematic is when people try to make it appear that spirituality was never part of Christianity, and that correct meditation is merely an intellectual excercise. Nothing can be farther from the truth.
And,
"How about the Protestants REDISCOVERING the authentic Christian mystical tradition after studying Buddhism, Hinduism and the like?

The truth of the matter is that the Roman Catholic Church lost its spirituality several centuries ago, so naturally the Protestants, Evangelicals, etc. know nothing about the TRUTH of mysticism.

Until, of course, they stumble upon the writings of the Church Fathers and see for themselves that the mystical tradition was never lost thanks to the Orthodox Church"
.

To meditate is to think about, to plan, to intend, to ponder, to consider, to ruminate. To pray is to simply talk to God. To thank God, to ask God, to have a relationship with God.
I can and I do discount everything that is pagan.
Paganism began with Nimrod and it continues down through the ages untill this day in the majority of the churches of the world. The city Babylon was built by Nimrod, the mighty hunter (Gen. 10:8-10). It was the seat of the first great apostasy against God after the flood. Here the Babylonian Cult was invented by Nimrod and his Queen, Semiramis. It was a system claiming the highest wisdom and ability to reveal the most divine secrets. This cult was characterized by the word "Mystery" because of its mysteries. Beside confessing to the priests at admission to this cult, one was compelled to drink of "mysterious beverages," which says Salvert (Des Sciences Occultes, Page 259) was indespensible on the part of those who saught initation into these mysteries. The "mysterious beverages' were composed of wine, honey, water, and flour. They were always of an intoxicating nature, and untill the aspirants had come under the influence of it and had their understanding dimmed they were not prepared for what they were to see and hear. The method was to introduce privately, little by little, information under seal of secrecy and sanction of oath that would be impossible to reveal otherwise. This has been the policy of the Roman Church and the secret of the power of the priests over the lives of men whom they could expose to the world for their sins that have been confessed to them. Once admitted, men were no longer Babylonians, Assyrians, or Egyptians, but were members of a mystical brotherhood, over whom was placed a Supreme Pontif or High Priest whos word was final in all things in thelives of the brotherhood regardless of the country in which they lived. The ostensible objects of worship were the Supreme Father, the Incarnate Female or Queen of Heaven, and her Son. The last two were only objects of worship, as the Supreme Father was said not to interfere with mortal affaires (Nimrod 111, Page 239). This system is believed to have come from fallen angels and demons. The object of the cult was to rule the world by these dogmas. Much more can be said but to simplify things, Damasus, Bishop of the Christian Church at Rome, was elected to the office of Supreme Pontif. He had been bishop for twelve years, having been made suchin 366 A. D. through influence of the monks of Mount Carmel, a college of the Babylonian religion originally founded by the priests of Jezebel and continued to this day in connection with Rome. So, in 378 A. D., the babylonian system of religion became part of Christendom, for the bishop of Rome, who later became the supreme head of the organized church, was already Supreme Pontiff of the Babylonian Order. All the teachings of pagan Babylon and Rome were gradually interspersed into the Christian religious organization. Soon after Damasus was made Supreme Pontiff, the rites of Babylon began to come to the front. The worship of the Roman Church became babylonish, and under him, the heathen temples were restored and beautified and the rituals established. Thus, the currupt religious system under the figure of a woman with a golden cup in her hand, making all nations drunk with her fornication, is called by God "MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT."

The first practice that grew up after this union was the introduction of the worship of the saints, especially of the virgin Mary. Thousands of pagans entered the church in those days who were accustomed to worshiping the gods of towns and places, who were not thoroughly Christianized. The veneration of saints and holy men became a worship. Saints were considered lesser dieties, whos intercession availed with God. Places connected with the lives of holy men were considered sacred and pilgrimages were started. Relics or bones of saints were believed to have miraculous power. The worship of the virgin Mary was set up in 381 A. D., three years after Damasus became bead of the Babylonian Cult.

Just as the Babylonian cult worshiped the "Queen of Heaven and her Son" and did not worship the Supreme Father because he simply did not interfere with mortal affairs, so the Roman Chrurch has a similar worship in that they worship Mary as the mother of God and her Son. The image of mother and child was an object of worship in Babylon long before Christ was born. From Babylon it spread to the ends of the Earth. The original mother was Semiramis, the beautiful queen of Nimrod, who was a paragon of unbridled lust and licentiousness.

In the "mysteries," which she had the chief part in forming, she was worshiped as Rhea (Chronicon Paschal, Volume 1, Page 65), the great "Mother of the God's" with such atrocious rites as identified her with Venus, the mother of all impurity. She raised Babylon, where she reigned to eminence among the nations as the great seat idolatry and consecrated prostetution (Hesiod, Theogonia, Volume 36, Page 435). The apocalyptic emblem of the harlot with cup in hand was one of idolatry derived from ancient Babylon, as they were exhibited in Greece, for thus the Greek Venus was originally represented (Herodotus, Historia, Book 1, cap. 199, Page 92).

Ironicilly the Roman Church has taken this as her emblem. In 1825 a medal was struck bearing the image of Pope Leo X11 on one side and on the other side Rome symbolized by a woman with a cross in her left hand and a cup in her right hand and a legend around her "Sedet Super Universum"; that is, "The whole world is her seat."

From this original practice, practically all nations have copied a similar worship, but in each land the same figure is carried out under different names. In Egypt the mother and child are known as Isis and Osiris; in India, Isi and Iswara; in Eastern Asia, Cybel and Deoius; in pagan Rome, Fortuna and Jupiter-puer; In Greece, Ceres or as Irene with Plutus in arms, etc. In Thibet, China, and Japan the Jesuits were suprised to find the counterpart of the madonna (the Italian name for virgin) and her child as devoutly worshiped as in Rome itself. Shing Moo, the mother of China, is there represented with child in her arms and a glory around her exactly as if a Roman artist had paintd her. Where did these nations get this common worship if not from Babylon before the dispersion by God in the days of Nimrod (Gen. 11). Thus the worship of Mary in connection with her Son is of Babylonian origin for there is no mention of such worshipin Scripture.

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts:10046
Joined:Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location:Dallas
Contact:

Re: Omnipotence of God

Post by Metacrock » Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:36 am

Sorry Hazard. you obviously have read zip about the tradition of Christian myticism or mystical experince itself. So you just know what you are talking about. Your stuff really does read like it's right out of two Babylons.

the RCC did not lose its' spiritualtiy, it's not paganism, it doesn't worship satan, it didn't invent the illuminati and it's not harboring big foot in the Vatican.

"paganism began with Nimrod." what stuipdity! they don't know jack shit about Nimrod. no one does. "PaganIsm" is nothing more than non Jewish religion. period. whoever had the first religious inkling was the first pagan, because he wasn't a Jew.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

User avatar
2thePoint
Posts:51
Joined:Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:51 pm
Location:Ohio
Contact:

Re: Omnipotence of God

Post by 2thePoint » Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:25 am

For the record, I have theo on ignore, so I am blissfully unaware of whatever he's ranting about.

But Meta, pretty much everybody's "facts of history" are wrong at some point-- including yours. What always amuses me is how willing people are to swallow any claim for authenticity about every book except the Bible. They believe pagan sources before God, and adopt elite, practically Gnostic attitudes about their special insider knowledge, dismissing the ignorant masses and denying they could possibly understand the "higher" things.

Sounds familiar... let's see...
Colossians 2:8
See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.

1 Tim. 6
These are the things you are to teach and insist on. 3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, 4 they are conceited and understand nothing. They have an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions 5 and constant friction between people of corrupt mind,... 20 Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, 21 which some have professed and in so doing have departed from the faith.
I commend Haz for having "read zip about the tradition of Christian myticism or mystical experince itself." It is worthless crap from the deluded. And why do the self-proclaimed "spiritual" think there is no spirituality outside of their own narrow definition? Why should pagan sources define spirituality instead of God? Do you see any hint of your brand of spirituality in the Bible?

Look at King David, the Psalm writer, the "man after God's own heart". He went on and on about... THE LAWS OF GOD. According to you, he must have been unspiritual.

I realize I'm speaking Klingon or something, but try listening instead to an expert in eastern orthodoxy who was so-named by the orthodox: http://mp3.sharpens.org/20070813ISI.mp3. It's from a live radio broadcast so you'll have to skip a few commercials, but check it out, and especially listen to the very end for his conclusions.
Those who know all the answers haven't heard all the questions.
Image

Post Reply