Jadespring and 's/he-is-all-in-all'

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jadespring

Jadespring

New member
Nineveh said:
You make Jesus' own birth here on earth, to walk with men into a defense of your pagan idea. Amazing.
None of this says God is His creation.
And none of this taken in context says God is part of His creation.
What book is that?
Your priestess has done a number on you. You defend buddhist ideas about God trying so very hard to make them into some form of Christianity.
God is not is-all-in-all. He is not what you flush down the comode, nor is He a child rapist. There is no shadow of turning in Him, He is not evil. He is not sinful, He is not unjust. He is not, nor can He be "is-all-in-all". Maybe you could understand it this way: The Isrealites would never have gotten in trouble for worshipping baal if God really was "is-all-in-all". How could the first commandment ever be broken if what you claim is true?
Click to expand...

Whatever Nin.
None of your responses actually address any sort of theological argument against these texts. Just more of the same old. You're wrong cause I need to be right, blah blah highschool like mentailty.
It's become perfectly clear to me that you're mind is just literally not capable of understanding the spiritual concept that I'm speaking about. Literalism is a curse it seems. Soem sort of spiritual atrophy or something. Whatever makes you happy. :)

It has got absoutley NOTHING to do with idol worship or anything of the other things you're trying to make it to be. NOTHING. :)
Look this is not a panenthesitic concept, nor buddhist, it's as much judeo christian as you're view. Check out some of the wisdom teaching traditions. It's as old as Christianity itself and as legitimate. Get out of your darn cacoon sometime and take a look at the world around you. In the big picture it doesn't even matter. God is God is God and we are here to do Christ's work.

Why do you even care that everyone see's him the exact way that you do?
 
Nineveh

Nineveh

Merely Christian
Jade,

You take Scriptures completely out of context and try to force them to uphold your belifes. What more can I say than, taking the recounting Jesus' birth as "proof" God is "is-all-in-all" is wrong?

Don't you get it yet?

Either the God of the Bible is a goofball, or we really can break the 1st commandment. If the latter is true, you are wrong.

Why do you even care that everyone see's him the exact way that you do?
Click to expand...

You claim to speak in the Name of Christ, so far you have uttered nothing but untruth.
 
Jadespring

Jadespring

New member
Nineveh said:
beefalobilly called you a pantheist. You replied with " Perhaps panentheism would be a better description if you are looking for a label." I think that suits your beliefs far better than "Protestant Christian".
Click to expand...

Yeah it was sarcastic.
 
Jadespring

Jadespring

New member
Nineveh said:
Jade,

You take Scriptures completely out of context and try to force them to uphold your belifes. What more can I say than, taking the recounting Jesus' birth as "proof" God is "is-all-in-all" is wrong?

Don't you get it yet?

Either the God of the Bible is a goofball, or we really can break the 1st commandment. If the latter is true, you are wrong.



You claim to speak in the Name of Christ, so far you have uttered nothing but untruth.
Click to expand...

Nin, I get it fine.
Just like I get you and you're intentions just fine.

As I said before or at least tried to explain.... This is not idolatry. I am in no way breaking any commandmant. You're the one who is not getting this. You are the one who is absolutely refusing to get the plain jane fact, that you're way and you're understanding ain't the be all and end all of Christian faith. Diversity ain't a problem. World's pretty darn dead without it.
Repeating the same thing over and over is not going to change that fact. Is this really the only way that you have to try to convince people? Repitition?

And I don't claim to speak. I do speak. And I will continue speaking. Sorry that you find this so problematic in your world. :)
God doesn't have a problem with it. Why should you?
 
Jadespring

Jadespring

New member
Rimi said:
You saw it here. Jaded worships dirt.
Click to expand...

Dude seriously. Grab a brain or something. :)

Where do you get that idea from?

You guys have been severely brainwashed or something. Where do you get your talking points from? They sure are not all from the Bible. This is like 12th centuary Anselmian thinking or something. Yeesh.
 
Nineveh

Nineveh

Merely Christian
Jadespring said:
Nin, I get it fine.
Just like I get you and you're intentions just fine.
Click to expand...

Can't we think this through, Jade?

The 1st Commandment, which you "agreed with":

"You shall have no other gods before me."

If you are right, then there is no possible way to break that command from God. Yet we see in the Bible evidence that God was angry at His own people for breaking that command. How? By following baal, ashteroth and molech. If God really is "is-all-in-all" then He shouldn't have gotten angry with His people. Because baal, ashteroth and molech are also part of "is-all-in-all". The Bible declares there is no shadow of turning in Him. Which means He can not be that part of your "is-all-in-all" god that is evil.

Does "is-all-in-all" mean "only the "good" stuff"? That leaves quite a bit for your god "all" not to be.

You don't see this yet, but you aren't only trying to redefine Protestant Chriatianity, you are trying to redefine God Himself.

Diversity
Click to expand...

Doesn't give you licence to define and redefine anything. And that's what you seem to want.

And I don't claim to speak. I do speak. And I will continue speaking.
Click to expand...

No one told you you couldn't. It's in Who's Name you utter these untruths that needs pointed out.

God doesn't have a problem with it. Why should you?
Click to expand...

God wrote a Book full of the evil men do. Simply trying to renamre and redefine sin doesn't make it any less evil.
 
Nineveh

Nineveh

Merely Christian
Jadespring said:
Dude seriously. Grab a brain or something. :)

Where do you get that idea from?

You guys have been severely brainwashed or something. Where do you get your talking points from? They sure are not all from the Bible. This is like 12th centuary Anselmian thinking or something. Yeesh.
Click to expand...


After you declaring yourself a "Christian (Other)" ... then "Protestant Christian", that God is really s/he-is-all-in-all, then not really saying there was a fall when you said so twice....

I will admit I wasn't shocked when you corrected panthiest to panentheist, nor "joked" you worshiped rocks. What I find odd is you reject the worship of rocks. Rocks are part of "is-all-in-all", too.
 
Jadespring

Jadespring

New member
Nineveh said:
Can't we think this through, Jade?
The 1st Commandment, which you "agreed with":

"You shall have no other gods before me."
Click to expand...

:doh:

Nin. There is only one God. One Creator. etc etc. This is got nothing to do with worshiping objects as God.
Free you're mind a little or something.

If you are right, then there is no possible way to break that command from God. Yet we see in the Bible evidence that God was angry at His own people for breaking that command. How? By following baal, ashteroth and molech. If God really is "is-all-in-all" then He shouldn't have gotten angry with His people. Because baal, ashteroth and molech are also part of "is-all-in-all". The Bible declares there is no shadow of turning in Him. Which means He can not be that part of your "is-all-in-all" god that is evil.
Click to expand...

*sighs* Concepts Nin. Concepts! Those Gods were concepts created by men.
Not God. Thus that argument is useless. Find another one.
You're concept of 'all' is materialist and literalist. I really don't know how to even begin to try to explain, esoteric spritual thought. We'd have to go back to the foundations of the way you think and conceptualize you're world.

Does "is-all-in-all" mean "only the "good" stuff"? That leaves quite a bit for your god "all" not to be.
Click to expand...
see above.

You don't see this yet, but you aren't only trying to redefine Protestant Chriatianity, you are trying to redefine God Himself.
[/QUOTE}
First off. There has never been one single irrefutible defintion of Christianity and or Protestant Christianity.
If you seem to think so them please do me a favor and give me the definition and when and where it came from.

Nin I ask. Seriously all sarcasm and anything else aside. What is a protestant Christian? What do they believe and what do they need to do to meet the criteria?

Nothing that I am saying is new, (to you sure I guess) It can be found in writings that go back to even before Jesus's time. If you want I can give you a list to look at. This is not redefining and it is not something that I'm personally endevoring to take upon myself.
Your definition of God is by no means universial and neither is the way that you approach your life with Christ.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Freak

Freak

New member
Jadespring, my friend, please clarify...

Is Jesus Christ God in the flesh?

Is Jesus the only means by which we can be saved?
 
Jadespring

Jadespring

New member
Nineveh said:
What I find odd is you reject the worship of rocks. Rocks are part of "is-all-in-all", too.
Click to expand...

Of course you would find it odd. It's because you don't understand that it's got nothing to do with worshipping individual things as God at all.
 
Nineveh

Nineveh

Merely Christian
Jadespring said:
:doh:

Nin. There is only one God. One Creator. etc etc. This is got nothing to do with worshiping objects as God.
Free you're mind a little or something.
Click to expand...

I hear this from pagans all the time. I know what God has to say about this, so why do I have to "free my mind" to understand what you want me to accept as Truth in Christ's Name? Why isn't what He has to say good enough?

*sighs* Concepts Nin. Concepts! Those Gods were concepts created by men.
Not God. Thus that argument is useless. Find another one.
You're concept of 'all' is materialist and literalist. I really don't know how to even begin to try to explain, esoteric spritual thought. We'd have to go back to the foundations of the way you think and conceptualize you're world.
Click to expand...

Explain how is-all-in-all really isn't is all in all. Why do you need to take off into some esoteric la la land? God didn't gloss over these idols, He made Laws against them, yet now you are trying to make them part of Him by naming Him "is-all-in-all". Would a "spiritual" way be better than a "literal" way when He Himself made this abundantly clear?
 
Nineveh

Nineveh

Merely Christian
Jadespring said:
Of course you would find it odd. It's because you don't understand that it's got nothing to do with worshipping individual things as God at all.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between God being is-all-in-all and the everything you claim Him to be?
 
Jadespring

Jadespring

New member
Nin why do you seem to skirt the question about what is the definition of a Protestant and a Christian ? When, where it came about and how?

I think I've ask it a few times now.

All I've gotten is and loud and clear.
'
"NOT YOU! and a then a bunch of name calling."

Give me you're definition and we'll see how one: how universial your criteria is and two: Just how much of the criteria I meet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top