A Question for S.T.Ranger
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 4 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-06-2012, 05:42 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(03-06-2012 04:03 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-06-2012 03:02 PM)Vosur Wrote:  [Image: 21420789.jpg]

I'm really starting to like this Vosur character. And not just because I think he would make a worthy Sumo opponent. Big Grin

[Image: vosur.png]

Okay, first Herman, but must you ridicule cousin it also?

(03-06-2012 04:39 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-06-2012 04:14 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  Since I can see that you guys really do like me, and miss me when I am gone...I will do a few more posts.

But, I really do have to get going.

Starting with this one: yes, I really would like to have a serious discussion; does that really need to be explained?

GTY


Okay. Seriously why would you want to survive your own death? And if you do, seriously what is your plan for making that happen? ... Think I got those in the proper order.


I will treat this as a serious question(s), GM:

Quote:why would you want to survive your own death?

Why would one...not want to?

I can tell you why (one would not want): because they hate the life they have now. Many people will commit suicide this year because of that. And that...is tragic.

As for me, I have no question about life after death, and this is result of what is taught in scripture, and what I base my beliefs on.

I believe that not only atheism, but certain religions contribute to this tragedy in what they teach. I won't bore you with details but will just say that in many cases, tragedy could be avoided.

Now if you ask because you are curious about my own thoughts concerning what it will be like, I can explain it like this, and I will just focus on reasons other than an obvious one, which is to see God: there is a physical realm, and there is a spiritual realm. We cannot, in our present state, enter into the spiritual realm, meaning, these bodies are no more suitable for that realm than we are for the moon (which I have recently learned is made of green cheese, by the way). But it goes beyond a matter of physical presence on the moon, and might better be likened to a fish trying to survive on dry land, though the difference being we can physically place a fish on dry land whereas we cannot place a physical body in the spiritual realm, at least, as far as we know.

Science Fiction has been a great motivation for scientists to pursue certain fields of interest, and we have had some remarkable advancements simply because someone thought of a concept. With what we know about matter at this time, I really do not think we are far from the time when we will see, like in the movie DOOM, door that are controlled to displace the physical matter that is solid one moment, transparent the next.

I have a great desire to see that. When the Lord appeared to the disciples, it was in a locked room. Some look at this as He appeared instantaneously. Another reason is that I believe that when we receive resurrection bodies, we will have bodies that will not be subject to physical boundaries, but will be able to maneuver in both physical and spiritual realms as Angels can, being spirit.

Another reason would be, judging by the beauty we see in this world...how beautiful would we imagine the very realm of God would be.

I know most of this sounds like pie-in-the-sky nonsense, but, based upon what little information we have about Heaven in scripture, these are a few reasons why I would want to survive death.


Quote:And if you do, seriously what is your plan for making that happen?

I cannot "make it happen," but trust that it is a done deal, as I mentioned to you in the other thread (howbeit facetiously...lol).

This is the heart of the teachings of scripture: Christ did that which man cannot do, which is to pay the penalty for the not just the sin committed during one's lifetime, but, for the sin nature man is born with. That is, if he is descended from Adam.

Death has the connotation of separation, and many Christians believe that man is born, through no fault of his own at birth, separated from God spiritually. In order for reconciliation to be made that this separation is ended, first, sin must be atoned for. If anyone questions Gd's motives or character, keep in mind that there was but One Sacrifice that could atone for man's sin, and that is the sacrifice of Christ. This was done nearly two thousand years ago, showing that God forgives man of future sin.

If we look at "making it happen," we could make this correspond to scripture's promise that if a man trust that Christ died for him, repents of his sin, and asks the Lord to forgive him...He will.

But us "making it happen" is still not in view, as it is God Who moves in the heart of man, convicting him of sin and instilling that man belief in the Gospel (which is that Christ died according to scripture, was buried, and rose the third day according to scripture...according to scripture referring to the teaching of the Old Testament), or in other words, granting belief to the man.

According to the promise of God in the Old Testament, at this point this man is born again, which includes the removal of his heart of stone, cleansing (washing of the water of the word...faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God), a new spirit (some, including myself, believe that man died spiritually in Adam, the focus being on separation from God, making man incapable of communing with God), and God said, "I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes."

This is the new birth. The "again" in born again referring not to the physical birth recurring (as Nicodemus inquired), but to man's spiritual death in Adam. Man was formed of the dust, God breathed into him the breath of life, and man became a living soul. God said "In the day you eat of this tree you shall surely die." Adam did not die physically, but spiritually, I believe. And again, we keep in view that death has the connotation of separation from God.

In His judgment of Adam, Eve, and Satan, God said that the "seed" of the woman would crush the head of Satan, and this can be viewed as it is in many places as speaking of "descendants," however, many (including myself) hold the view that this is a reference to Christ. The first account of the Gospel.

So it is my view that I cannot "make it happen," nor did I "make it happen," but that it happened some Two Thousand years ago, though it was known "it would happen" before the foundation of the world was laid, according to scripture.

Sorry for going so long, but you did attach the word "serious" to your question, and this is in my view a serious matter.

Last note, I appreciate the humor. A little lacking of tact much of the time (lol), but appreciated just the same.

GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes S.T. Ranger's post
03-06-2012, 05:53 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(03-06-2012 05:42 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  I will treat this as a serious question(s), GM:

It was a serious question, I mean as far as serious goes, and I appreciate your response.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2012, 06:02 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(03-06-2012 03:11 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  "You sought to mock this...how did that turn out for you, my friend?"

bla bla bla ....

I proved to everyone here that we are wasting our time with you, because apart from spouting Babble verses you know nothing about your own cult's history and development.


As I said a few pages back, and the gentleman keeps asserting in his attempt at deflection, with the discrediting of my sources, in an attempt to get me down the rabbit hole to fight him with Babble quotes, (which is ALL he knows how to do), if he can PROVE that a random walk through Wiki is more probable than my links, then he will be made a faculty member of MIT tomorrow. Do you know what those words mean S.T. ? Cooking up shit about verses is not scholarship. You ARE held to no rules. You have no rules, except spouting more verses. You do realise you are making Babble Thumpers look really bad here ? Did you actually think, with your pathetic level of knowledge you would come here and change anyone's mind ? I offered you a deal. Give ONE external source for every quote. You are incapable. I offered to use ONLY Christian sources. You can't handle it. It turned out just as I said it would on Friday ... a total waste of time. If you think you are "proved right", fine. The moon is made of green cheese. (BTW, "someone's eles's ideas" might just have some value, but since you never went to school, you wouldn't know about all that, now would you ?)

(03-06-2012 04:55 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  S.T. acutually thinks I was talking to him. It's why I kept it to the thrid person. It has NOTHING to do with him. The only reason I got into was to point out that his crap about "falling into idolatry" was total historical BS. The real, actual historical first covenant was to obtain favor in battle from the god of the armies. He needs to tell himself that it's something else, or his myths don't connect. The real history is found starting in the Enuma Elish, http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/enuma.htm . The only reason I post anything here is for the guests, to give them a small glimpse of the other side, and what really goes on in serious academia, and not the First Grade crap of the Babble Spouters. He hasn't even read Karen Armstrong's "A History of God", http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...5399093528# and is unable to say where or why even one sentence of it is wrong. He was unable to watch the Yahweh video, as he has no knowledge to argue against it. If he had an ounce of sense, he would have gone and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg , found the on-line refutations of it. They are great. They show how it is incorrect, in a few places. They also give interested people a small glimpse into how real scholars interact, instead of spouting Babble verses, and the really serious depth of knowledge some of them have of Ancient History, and the level of discussion that real scholars have. http://scrollhouse.com/downloadable/down...nk_id/249/

The spouting is a fascinating human behavior. The endless spouting and connecting of verses, especially the high art that Catholics have taken it to, in their nauseating sentimental drivel, is truely amazing ... that adults would actually engage in the behaviors. People with no other expertise or knowledge start doing "bible study", and it seems to fill some sort of need. At least they are good at something. Welcome to the world of BibleMan. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/BibleMan

Again, we can change the tone of the conversation. You will find I am not such a bad guy after all. I will, though, if forced, bring to the forefront that which I see.

Take this post for instance: you are now forced to garner support from allies, because you are worried they will actually catch on to what is being said.

You were not talking to me? This is why you speak in the third person? Let me quote your own words:

Do you know what those words mean S.T. ? Cooking up shit about verses is not scholarship. You ARE held to no rules. You have no rules, except spouting more verses. You do realise you are making Babble Thumpers look really bad here ? Did you actually think, with your pathetic level of knowledge you would come here and change anyone's mind ? I offered you a deal. Give ONE external source for every quote. You are incapable. I offered to use ONLY Christian sources. You can't handle it. It turned out just as I said it would on Friday ... a total waste of time. If you think you are "proved right", fine. The moon is made of green cheese. (BTW, "someone's eles's ideas" might just have some value, but since you never went to school, you wouldn't know about all that, now would you ?)[/b]


Now, while I admit you play to an audience, I have to seriously question this if you are saying that you were not...talking to me. Is this a kind of an anonymous letter kind of deal, er, I mean...thingy?

lol

Look, I can be as facetious as the next guy. I really don't mind having these little jousting parties, they are actually kind of fun. It does distract from intelligent conversation (and I am man enough to admit I can be childish) though, but...the choice is yours.

I would much prefer to talk with you like normal people talk (lol), as that is far more interesting. You don't have to pretend we are on equal terms, I am, after all, a self admitted high-school drop-out, I can understand your contempt...lol.

Okay, I have made a liar out of myself by coming back (<---setting myself up again, fellas, don't miss this one), so, I will try, and I stress the word try, to banish myself for the day.

GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2012, 06:05 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(03-06-2012 05:53 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-06-2012 05:42 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  I will treat this as a serious question(s), GM:

It was a serious question, I mean as far as serious goes, and I appreciate your response.

Thanks, GM. And whether you like it or not (lol), I hope you have a blessed week.

See y'all later.

GTY
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes S.T. Ranger's post
03-06-2012, 06:12 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(03-06-2012 06:05 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(03-06-2012 05:53 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  It was a serious question, I mean as far as serious goes, and I appreciate your response.

Thanks, GM. And whether you like it or not (lol), I hope you have a blessed week.

See y'all later.

GTY

Crazy fucker

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2012, 06:15 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(03-06-2012 06:12 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-06-2012 06:05 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  Thanks, GM. And whether you like it or not (lol), I hope you have a blessed week.

See y'all later.

GTY

Crazy fucker
In the immortal words of Billy Joel..."you may be right."
lol
But I am working on that, big guy.
And now...later...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2012, 06:27 PM (This post was last modified: 03-06-2012 06:41 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
Not one point addressed. It's only about the guest. That is all it's about.

Besides the "spouting behaviors" thingy, it might be interesting to have a discussion about "elitism" here, as it's been rasied in this context. It makes American's VERY uncomfortable. I don't see a way around it . (?)

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2012, 06:55 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
I am now confirmed the credibility of this video by ST's behavior here. Feel sry for you guys have to deal with such insanely idiocy everyday.



Life is too important to be taken seriously.
- Oscar Wilde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jedah's post
03-06-2012, 10:40 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(03-06-2012 02:47 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  Okay, so you believe that Jesus did not exist at all. Can you tell me why you would not?

Cause I remember being with Paul at Corinth, sillies. I said that. Big Grin

And Romans, which is essentially all there is to the New Testament. See, if one reads it as "Jesus died for our sins," then that contradicts Ezekiel; but if one reads it as "Jesus is an allegorical device for entrance into the Holy of Holies," there is no contradiction. Another problem we're gonna have is that you're into the gospels, whereas I'm convinced that they are entirely fabricated from whole cloth for the purpose of "fleshing out" Paul's allegorical Christ.

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
03-06-2012, 10:44 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(03-06-2012 04:05 PM)Jedah Wrote:  Could we give it a "GeeGee" and switch topic to "Gwynetheism"? Big Grin

That's Gwynnite, you sillies. And I talk about her all too much. Big Grin

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: