VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]
Subject: Re: The Laws response part two


Author:
silverfox
 		[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 22:53:11 11/15/04 Mon
In reply to: Abel 's message, "The Laws" on 22:02:24 11/15/04 Mon
 Abel, since no buddhists are here and as with most religions i don't think we despute all things come from god. ALthough ones view on god or what is god might differ. I don't think nesecerally spirituals laws gain anymore meaning by being in a different religion but because of my predispotions they make some bad sense to me. My guess is that you sudden turn to chirstanity was perhaps like vince you made stupid choices when it came to the occult. Now i think the pagans here are wiser than you in the fact that they aren't to stubborn to realize that spiritual laws keep the same meaning and beauty just cause they are applied by a different religion. If they don't believe in jesus it seems liek you want to discredit their spiritual laws as not being as good as chirsanity. PLus i am pretty sure that buddhist and other eastern religions were able to develop their laws seperate without any infulence from christanity. Honestly since i am not christian i really don't see the concept of what believing in christ does or how it saves u because i already see us being opened to god and so far through debates you or anyone else i have debated has failed to show me enough or given a strong enhgouh argument to prove me otherwise. As for trusting one little fact in a movie i would say it is probably just a wise as trusting a book that you can only assume is god's word. As for jesus yes i am sure he did have muhc more to tell us as i said but, i don't think most people be ready for it. Just cause i think we are all part of god or all god in a sense doesn't mean i think we still in a way aren't governned by spiritual laws. Now i don't think the majority of ppl be able to handle a philosphioy like this. I don't pciture you really be able to deal with it, when you think people like ghandi are fools cause they chose different spiritual paths or chose to find different spiritual truths chrianity might hold through a different path. Honestly i question how spiritual anyone is that can bad mouth ghandi and buddha for thatm atter just calling them fools. As for god's word being toyed with by man why not, man was given free will so if what was in it was valuable and got lost by translation it be are fault also, your making hte assumption it is GOD"S word. But if we have free will then obivoually that would include the free will to transfer and translate the word as we thought god saw fit. I know the book of enoch was left out of the bible so ya, it is not like it isn't possible,
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
Subject Author Date
Re: The Laws response part twoAbel23:23:56 11/15/04 Mon

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.