Saturday, April 22, 2017

Simple Schmiple



"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."
2 Corinthians 11:3
(While not of fan of a real Eve or a talking Serpent , even I know Dave ain't simple)

29Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”
Matthew 11:30
(and the burdens he puts on everyone ain't light! Well...and he hardly fits the gentle and humble in heart either)

But.....


Dave says it's so, so it must be so...

PROPHECY TOOL

125 Events in Prophetic Sequence from Now Forward!

If you only read a single document not produced by your organization, this is that document! A loving God always warns His people before disaster strikes.(Just not in person, accurately or in a credible way) This is part of that warning! What follows is a largely complete list of prophecies God foretold in His Word.(Through my gift of prooftexting) Some events carry more detail to establish crucial basics of what lies ahead. A few footnotes are at the end. As referenced, take time to read them. Every tool we offer cannot say everything, (Or anything real actually) therefore only a limited number of scriptures are included where they are most helpful.  This is so readers who care can attempt their own pursuit of true understanding. Realize that symbolism, certain big mistranslations and mysterious sounding context make this task difficult. (And theologically and historically stupid) But the verses provided will permit you to learn enough to see the Church’s understanding was far from complete.(So far, in fact, it was badly mistaken) Consider reading the document for flow and general knowledge before looking up the scriptures, which every serious person would do. The later-numbered sermon transcripts that we have posted tell the much fuller story with extensive scriptural support. Events in red (#19-32, 59-70 and 86-88) are simultaneous. Their sequence could vary earlier or later within the day of occurrence. This list is CORRECT!"
 (Not even close)
"Here is the general framework most of God’s people hold about prophecy and Christ’s Return… (or else)
Here is what actually happens…"  (Like all the previous actually happened)
1) The book of Daniel is fully unsealed (Dan. 12:9)—“knowledge is increased” (vs. 4)—before the trial that “purges” and “makes white” God’s people (vs. 10 and 11:35). This unsealing did not come in Mr. Armstrong’s time. Major elements of impossible-to-dismiss prophetic meaning from chapters 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 in Daniel were not known to the Church. They are now. These in turn open up many other areas of prophecy so that the increase of knowledge is not just from Daniel.
2) God’s messenger then “prepares the way” (Mal. 3:1) before Christ comes from heaven to His entire spiritual Temple.
3) Worsening—but deceptively so—world conditions, which are (already being) observed by the confused, frightened masses on Earth, invite a fraudulent “savior” to come “fix” the world and set up the “kingdom.”
4) “Mockers” and “scoffers” rule in all corners, including everywhere among God’s people (II Pet. 2:3Jude 18). The result is that when there is still sufficient time to escape, most (but not all) cannot make themselves “take heed” (Luke 21:834Mark 13:33).
5) Unexpectedly, and in spectacular, earth-rocking fashion, the biblical “Man of Sin” (II Thes. 2:3)—the same as the “Antichrist [who] shall come” (I John 2:18)—literally descends into Jerusalem, and upon the world, as “god.” He brings and immediately displays “ALL power, signs, and lying wonders” (II Thes. 2:9) starting 1,335 days before the true Christ descends into Jerusalem. This is the devil’s never-before-seen full power unleashed! Ponder this. God says this man will “devour” (Heb: eat), “tread down” (Heb: trample) and “break” (Heb: crush) the “whole earth” (Dan. 7:23). This counterfeit savior is visible worldwide (Zech. 5:6) and is the “snare” Christ warned of in Luke 21:34-36 that strikes the “whole earth” in one day. Also see Revelation 3:10. Paul calls this “the evil day” in Ephesians 6:13. This man is of the “little horn” and is the 7th head/resurrection of the Daniel 7 Roman fourth beast, as well as the “fierce king” of “dark sentences” and enormous power of Daniel 8:9-12,"
......... and 120 more meandering simplicities and burdenless easy yokes in Christ .
                                https://rcg.org/sep/125-events-in-prophetic-sequence

49 comments:

Anonymous said...

As I was saying on another thread...

"From these facts the conclusion seems inevitable that Einstein cannot be regarded as a scientist of real note. He is not an honest investigator" Professor O.E. Westin.

"In a sense, Einstein had 'appropriated' Hilbert's contribution to the gravitational field equations as a march of his own ideas--or so it would seem from the reading of his 1916 Ann. d. Phys. paper on the foundations of General Relativity". Prof Jagdish Mehra.

"Remarkably, Einstein was not the first to discover the correct form of the law of warpage ... Recognition for the first discovery must go to Hilbert" Prof. Kip Thorne.

"...Gerber, who has given the correct formula for the perihelion motion of Mercury before I did" A. Einstein.

"No unprejudiced person can deny that ... Einstein must, in view of the circumstantial evidence previously presented, stand convicted before the world as a plagiarist." Prof. Arvid Reuterdahl.

"Einstein arrived at the same formula P. Gerber had found a long time before him" -- Stjepan Mohorovicic.

"The relativity theory advanced by Professor Einstein is held in such uncomprehending awe by the vast majority of people that it is not generally known there exists a far from unanimous acceptance of it in the scientific world" -- Irving Levy, The New York Times.

"Under the circumstances is it any wonder that some of us who owe a duty of truth to the public, should be obliged to vigorously contest the unauthorized and indefensible conclusion that the observed refraction of starlight near the sun is a confirmation of the discredited doctrine of relativity?" T. J. J. See.

"You ask whether it makes a ludicrous impression on me [Einstein] to observe the excitement of the crowd for my teaching and my theory, of which it, after all, understands nothing? I find it funny and at the same time interesting to observe this game. I believe quite positively that it is the mysteriousness of what they cannot conceive which places them [the public] under a magic spell. One tells them of something big that will influence all future life, of a theory which only a small group, highly learned, can comprehend. Big names are mentioned of men who have made discoveries, of which the crowd grasps nothing. But it impresses them, takes on color and the magic power of mystery, and thus one becomes enthusiastic and excited." Albert Einstein, reported in New York Times, July 8, 1921.

Hoss said...

And speaking of prophecy, Bob Thiel's latest post was an article by Norman Edwards, Need Prophets more than Prophecy. Following the article, Bob commented:

He [Norman] is not part of the Continuing Church of God, where, I function as its human leader (and am an ordained prophet; the only known such prophet in any legitimate Church of God group).

That's the first time I've seen Bob claim ordained prophet. Now he wasn't ordained by Rod Meredith, nor by Gaylyn Bonjour, so Bob may have been ordained a prophet in Africa during his circular certificate signing ceremony.

Anonymous said...

I could keep going and going (like the ever-ready bunny) but I'll try to resist the temptation (at least for a while) to add more than these two.

"You imagine that I look back on my life's work with calm satisfaction. But from nearby it looks quite different. There is not a single concept of which I am convinced that it will stand firm, and I feel uncertain whether I am in general on the right track." Albert Einstein to Maurice Solovine, 1949.

"I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e. on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." Albert Einstein.

DennisCDiehl said...

Anon 7:09

Just as in religion, science does have it's drama and trama of who came first and plagiarism. Especially more so 100 years ago during Einstein's prime when the public could not check and there was much less peer review or at least not as professionally applied. HWA plagiarized his US and BC "revealed truth" from Jacobs Scepter and Joseph's Birthright. Any number of members left the church having stumbled upon that book as they were lead to believe that HWA came up with this thru his "vigorous" six month study in the Portland Library. He probably found the book there.

The controversy over Einstein and the competition between his peers is well known and documented. I do not think the theory of relativity is under much question today and many brilliant physicists have taken up the search for how the Universe works since Einstein so it's a yawner for me in that regard. Some question the how and why of the Big Bang as well but that something banged is a given now as are theories well thought out and always subject to change and new information that might even lead to the fact that we are merely one bang of many. One grape universe in a cluster, in one row of one vineyard in one region. I like that and lots of scientists are working together to solve these mysteries. It's not a one many show in science as it may have been 100 years ago on new topics.

Dave Pack plagiarizes plagiarizers coming up with even worse conclusions that the first mistaken ones.

The Apostle Paul "plagiarized" the Gnostics for his Cosmic Christ and rather pagan rendition of Jesus long before the anonymous writers of the Four Gospels ripped OT scriptures out of context and weaving a story about an earthly Jesus that is mostly unprovable in actual history. They did so because they did not actually know much about Jesus or needed better stories

Paul takes complete credit for his Gospel which he said he received from no man and learned nothing of Jesus from the Jerusalem Apostles. (Galatians 1-2) Of course he did not really have a god tell him what was up just as he really did not go to any Third Heaven to tell people he heard and saw things that he is not allowed to tell about. He also did not get his Lord's Supper views from any dead Jesus,(that which I received from the Lord). Pure baloney. Paul took his eating the body and drinking the blood of the god from paganism. Eating human flesh and drinking their blood may have gone over with the pagans and was a hit for Paul but the Jews? I don't think so and they can't be blamed for that.

All that to say, Einstein did not credit his contemporaries properly. One would not get away with that long today in academia.

Anyway, back to Dave's Complexity that is in his Christ.

Anonymous said...

I wonder how much time complacent people like Dennis have spent investigating the other side of the relativity or big bang issues by reading what critics themselves say. I'd guess it's next to nothing, in which case his views have very little or no weight.

Anonymous said...

"One would not get away with that long today in academia."

I beg to differ. I have had my work stolen on several occasions, and there was NOTHING I could do about it. I've heard other people complain about the same thing.

Byker Bob said...

Are we really seeing plagiarism and false credit-taking (example: Edison and Tesla), or is what we witness in the case of Einstein a simple natural progression, one scientist building upon a foundation that others have partially laid, and in the process, through superior understanding, creating what turns out to be a unique and solid amalgam?

Humans borrow, blend and change. It's a dynamic evolutionary process which we find in many fields, one of the most visible of which is music. The thing is that in the field of religion, because someone claims to have received knowledge directly from God when it is provable that he plagiarized it and used it without properly crediting a real human source, that is cause to question all of the man's teachings. However, improper or partial crediting may cast doubt upon a scientist's character, but only more accurate science can correct his work. As was also part of the original discussion, in the case of Dawson and Piltdown Man, the scientific community not only eventually revealed Dawson's character flaws, but also proved the bogusness of his work.

BB

Hoss said...

Dennis wrote: Portland Library. He probably found the book there.

I believe so. There was something in Ambassador Report about what the old card catalog at Portland Public Library contained.

and... One would not get away with that [plagiarism] long today in academia

If wasn't for Dr Martin Luther King being famous and dead, his PhD would have probably been revoked due to one quote he didn't accredit in his thesis.

It's amazing how the publication of the admitted fictitious report on human cloning in South Korea published in Nature some years ago passed peer review.

Hoss said...

...and just one more thing...

The Apostle Paul "plagiarized" the Gnostics for his Cosmic Christ

FWIT, Paul's teacher, Gamaliel, was credited with also having instructed his students in various aspects of Greek culture. So Gamaliel's students should have been familiar with Gnosticism.

Minimalist said...

D.D: "The Apostle Paul "plagiarized" the Gnostics for his Cosmic Christ and rather pagan rendition of Jesus long before the anonymous writers of the Four Gospels ripped OT scriptures out of context and weaving a story about an earthly Jesus that is mostly unprovable in actual history. They did so because they did not actually know much about Jesus or needed better stories"

Exactly:
The Supersessionism theory that Christianity hangs on has very fragile underpinnings - namely crude exegesis of one 'Paul of Tarsus' found in fragmentary documents dating to perhaps 5th or 6th decades of the 1st century.

Christianity, Islam, Mormonism .. claim divine supersession from Judaism, 'confirmed' by 'miracles', that, wouldn't you know, lack secular documentation :-(

Anonymous said...

60) The work of Elijah (again, formerly Joshua) ends. So does that of the other “son of oil”—Zerubbabel. Well aware of Zechariah 4:14, it is these positions on either side of Christ that the brothers James and John and their mother asked Christ to give to these two men (Matt. 20:20-23; Mark 10:35-40). Like the Two Witnesses, these men powered by Christ function together for 3.5 years.

Pack is literally claiming that he will be standing next to Christ, is he not? I am assuming he still is claiming to be "Joshua and Elijah" and that HWA is "Zerubbabel."

Anonymous said...

NOTE: While most of God’s people at least know of some of the terms in the above list, they are largely a complete jumble to them, with none knowing much of when or how they occur—or even what they are or mean. Don’t look for one minister in any of your congregations to be aware of the first 90 points. However sincere, because they were not in the only place where they were revealed, they are incapable of critiquing them with even remotely helpful comments....

Minimalist said...


God's HQ near Akron must be downwind from the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

I think God's earthly Apostle has been inhaling synthetic rubber fumes.

God is 'vulcanizing' a people for the climatic clash of the 'Last-Days'!

God's traveling-troubleshooter, Gerald Waterhouse, will be revived to preach.

DennisCDiehl said...

The Apostle Paul "plagiarized" the Gnostics for his Cosmic Christ

FWIT, Paul's teacher, Gamaliel, was credited with also having instructed his students in various aspects of Greek culture. So Gamaliel's students should have been familiar with Gnosticism.

Big topic I suppose, but there is no evidence, either from Paul himself, save that he was the smartest pencil in the box and a Pharisee of the Pharisees, that he ever was a student of Gamaliel. This is a "fact" added to the Book of Acts. In reality, Paul does not talk like a pharisee and his arguments for his version of the Gospel are not done as one might expect a Pharisee to do.

A Pharisee of the Pharisee with Roman Citizenship as Paul claimed would also present as quite a problem. Somewhat like a President of the US also belonging to some White Supremacist Group or something like that. Sadducees worked for the Romans, not Pharisees. Paul also was born in Tarsus, a city of pure paganism, Mithraism and such which could have captured the mind of god haunted boy.

I'd suggest a good read of Paul the Mythmaker by Hyam Jacobby for another side of Paul's claims about himself .

DennisCDiehl said...

Anonymous said...
I wonder how much time complacent people like Dennis have spent investigating the other side of the relativity or big bang issues by reading what critics themselves say. I'd guess it's next to nothing, in which case his views have very little or no weight.

Complacent? lol. BTW. I'm right here reading you and you don't have to comment as if I am not sitting right next to you here in the room.

You gotta be the same person who said I obviously had a low IQ (135) and wasn't man enough to talk to you face to face. At least you sound like him. All or nothing phrases about people as in "if they don't know what I know then they must know next to nothing." If you are him. I did send and give you my email to get my phone number so we could talk and meet face to face. No reply. Whoever that was not man enough to follow through with his all or nothing statements and accept my offer. Dave Pack never answered me either for a discussion. Insulated Castle dwellers are like that with their audience.

I'd be more interested in not what you believe as beliefs can change with time and new information. I'm fascinated by why you believe it and in such a defensive and put down style.

DennisCDiehl said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
"One would not get away with that long today in academia."

I beg to differ. I have had my work stolen on several occasions, and there was NOTHING I could do about it. I've heard other people complain about the same thing.

What was your work and how was it stolen? I know this can easily happen in a company setting but I am speaking of outcomes of the scientific method being used to address a hypothesis to see if it worthy of a theory etc. What you experienced can no doubt be maddening if in a company environment where everyone wants to promote themselves.

DennisCDiehl said...

Someone once accused me of "using human reasoning." I asked him what kind of reasoning did he use. I suspect everything in him wanted to say he used the same reasoning God and Christ used. He at least knew enough not to answer that one.

Black Ops Mikey said...

Now, now, kiddies! It's easy to get distracted by such things as who plagiarized from whom and who was greater, like Newton and Liebnitz. And Dennis: Only a 135 I.Q.? You poor deficient thing!

Well, anyway, we need to concentrate on what Davie Pack said.

No, wait.

This reminds me of the story you all saw me tell before of the guy in the Davenport Hotel room in Spokane one Sunday afternoon giving a lecture about how the earth was hollow with people living inside and how they flew flying saucers out of the north pole.

It's difficult to see that Davie's stories are much different and if I were you, I wouldn't spend a whole heck of a lot of time on them, except, you know, entertainment value mocking them. Like online gambling, for instance.

Anonymous said...

Instead of making excuses for Einstein or downplaying his plagiarism, based on wishful thinking, get the facts by reading books like "Albert Einstein the Incorrigible Plagiarist". It was plagiarism, pure and simple. And the point is science is not the pure search for truth that people assume it is and that people put more or less blind faith in. Religion has its frauds and so does science. People are people. All human institutions are corrupt and politicized.

Anonymous said...

"You gotta be the same person who said I obviously had a low IQ (135) and wasn't man enough to talk to you face to face."

Sorry, wrong person. Respond to facts and arguments rather than assumed personalities.

Anonymous said...

"I do not think the theory of relativity is under much question today ..."

You are right. It has been totally refuted. But you would have to read both sides to know that. Very very few people do that.

Some (perhaps all) mainstream journals refuse to publish papers on the subject anymore. Seems they got tired of the endless controversy so they just put an end to it.

Hoss said...

Somebody wrote: I have had my work stolen on several occasions

I've thought that about some of my work too. But more likely, someone had the same idea, and had acted on it, when I just sat on it. Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity".

Byker Bob said...

Fundamentalists would probably dance an Irish Jig if the theory of relativity were credibly called into question or debunked. And, of course that would be the headline. The body of the article might point out that the theory had been revised or replaced by something very similar, but the fundamentalist would go off joyfully believing that one alternative take on creation "week" had just been flushed down the drain pipe, soley based on the headline.

BB

Anonymous said...

So what about getting back to the original topic of this post, crazy Dave?

Anonymous said...

33) Christ begins the last half (approximately 3.5 years) of the Daniel 9:27 prophetic “week” to confirm His covenant with Israel (Mal. 3:1). (The first half was His earthly ministry before dying as Savior.) This forms the “marvelous Work and Wonder” (Isa. 29:14; Hab. 1:5; 3:2; Acts 13:41) under Christ of preaching the gospel as a witness to all nations. This has not yet technically begun because this is a Kingdom task that continues to the “END” (see event #54)—when Christ enters Jerusalem. Mark 16:15 says the gospel will be preached to “every creature.”

So Pack is saying that the "work" is not being done today, it is a "Kingdom task".

Anonymous said...

"Fundamentalists would probably dance an Irish Jig if the theory of relativity were credibly called into question or debunked."

You did not provide any evidence that what you think they will do is accurate. How do you know what they will do?

And since you are (for some reason) afraid of what fundamentalists think it is necessary to pretend that any opposition has no merit?

Anonymous said...

I've thought that about some of my work too. But more likely, someone had the same idea, and had acted on it, when I just sat on it. Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity".

Removing my name from a paper that I worked on and adding names of people who did not work on it ONE IOTA is pretty blatant plagiarism. It was pure politics, which they privately admitted, and if you complain your career could be OVER. But people on here want to make excuses for situations they know nothing about. They just can't grasp the reality of corruption in academia. Unbelievable.

Anonymous said...

8.52 AM
The planet is hollow with flying saucers coming out if it. They are making a movie about it called Iron Sky 2. Not forgetting, Nazis live there as well.

Anonymous said...

According to a newspaper article, Einstein's famous E=MCsquare appeared in a Italian book before Einstein published his theory of relativity. It said that they do not know whether Einstein was aware of the books content. He might have read it, then worked backwards to formulate his theory. Who knows?
On His return, Christ might give the honor to someone else. if He will bother with such detail.

Byker Bob said...

Afraid? No, the Irish jig image was supposed to make people laugh. Like we do at the flat earthers and the young earth creationists who must disregard proven science to maintain their beliefs. No evidence is required in predicting their reaction, because their long past track record has been so well established.

It must be nice to be able to enjoy a nicely stoned Sunday afternoon. Why not come back for some real exchanges when you are not enjoying 'ludes?

BB

Anonymous said...

It must be nice to be able to enjoy a nicely stoned Sunday afternoon. Why not come back for some real exchanges when you are not enjoying 'ludes?

Infantile strawman arguments and lies.

Anonymous said...

Almost forgot, you can watch the trailers for the Iron Sky 2 movie, with its hollow earth, dinosaurs ridden by Nazis, and flying saucers. The truth is out there folks.

Hoss said...

Anon 240:

My apologies. Something similar to what you described happened where I worked long ago. And nothing (as far as I know) was done about it.

Some years ago I saw an article in Science or Nature about a study that checked a number of research papers against a research database and found about 30% had some plagiarized content. The dean where I worked asked me to review a Master's thesis of a colleague who wanted him to read it and make any suggestions before it was submitted. When I returned it I told him the only "original work" it contained was in the acknowledgements where she thanked her professors.

Anonymous said...

Dennis often refers to the scientific method, but fails to apply it on the fundamental issue of Gods existence. If he was sincere, he would test the hypothesis as to whether God exists by
1 living by Gods laws and
2 Praying and studying the bible.
The result of this would be answered prayer, which would also prove that the bible is Gods inspired word.
But no, Dennis doesn't do this, but rather just reads and quotes to us from his apostate books.
Compartmentalizing the scientific method is not a admirable trait.

Retired Prof said...

8:43 AM, you're being disingenuous. You've read enough of Dennis's posts and comments to know full well that he spent a major portion of his life carrying out the very experiment you urge him to perform. You also know that he found the results inconsistent with your hypothesis. He reported those results, and yet you ignore them.

It is not Dennis who fails to apply the scientific method. It is you.

Anonymous said...

Retired Prof
Only Dennis and God knows whether he has applied the above experiment faithfully, and whether at some point God did in fact answer his prayers.
By contrast, millions through out history have carried out the experiment, with the result of God consistently answering their prayers.
I remind you that about half of the former WCG members did no or next to no prayer and bible study.
I also remind you that it was obvious that many WCG members had given up trying to live by the ten commandments. These were the church crazies, though some did lay low.

Anonymous said...

Dennis generally uses a historical approach, not a scientific one. I agree that living by God's laws and using prayer is more scientific. However, some of us did that and got mixed results when in a COG, and still get mixed results after giving up the holy days and sabbath. Many ex-COG people are confused on why the mixed results, so they have given up and are in denial of anything spiritual. Prayer is not scientific in the usual sense because different people get different results. There is no reason to expect them to get the same results. A person's individual faith and spirituality are some possible reasons why.

Anonymous said...

Dennis often refers to the scientific method, but fails to apply it on the fundamental issue of Gods existence. If he was sincere, he would test the hypothesis as to whether God exists by
1 living by Gods laws and
2 Praying and studying the bible.


I recommend a scientific experiment for you too.

1. Live by the laws of some other belief system or religion.
2. Study their core literature and pray to their god or gods.
3. See how those results compare to the results of Christian Fundamentalism.
4. Give up your faith if you find a religion or philosophy that gives better results.

Anonymous said...

"Why not come back for some real exchanges..."

Real exchanges can only take place with sincere people with something meaningful to say. That would exclude you. So just ignore my posts from now on.

DennisCDiehl said...

Anonymous said...
Dennis often refers to the scientific method, but fails to apply it on the fundamental issue of Gods existence. If he was sincere, he would test the hypothesis as to whether God exists by
1 living by Gods laws and
2 Praying and studying the bible.

Try not to judge my sincerity.

26 years as a pastor
14 congregations
5 states
A few thousand laying on of hands
Tithing+ 70 thousand
A score of child burials
Praying lots and lots and lots and lots about lots and lots and lots
Fasting
Going where sent
1500 sermons
tons of studies
A gabillion miles driven
Hope hoped for.
Faith exhibited
Patience galore
Depression and anxiety kept to myself
Thousands of counselings
Lots of theology studied
Lots of Scripture soaked up
Lots believing the promises of scripture
lots of hugs and hand holding
Lots of personal and family sacrifice, upheaval and regrets
Too many children to bury whose angels did NOT even show up much less "do watch over them."
Anointing the sick followed by funerals
Prayer then nothing. "The answer is no" is bullshit
Giving and going without
Inspiring the giving of about 75 million
Questions asked of Administration. Yelled at for asking
No retirement "because Jesus worked a miracle, (i.e. tricked us), and we don't have any money."
25 year watch given with dead battery. Returned it a month later after deciding not to just throw it in Lake Ontario as intended.

Depression anxiety faced professionally. Church administration tells me I am weak and hiding in the medical/counseling help I am getting.
Asked me what I learned form counseling. Like a fool I told them. They laughed and said, "yeah yeah...we've heard that all before."
In my mind I tell them to go to hell
It all falls apart


Experiment complete.

God, Jesus, Bible, Church, Chosen Apostles and leading Evangelists fail on every level.

Prove me now herewith and prove all things ...in the word of truth fails.

I would have made one hell of a paleontologist...

Did I say don't judge my sincerity...ever? Well don't ....ever

I could not be more at peace, content and enjoying learning what I would not look at for far too many years.

Summation: I only ever wanted and still do want to know what is true and what is not. Religion is not true. Science is more true every day and in every way.

I like being the current end result of human evolution and going back to stardust from whence I came in the future. (So will you all btw)

Truth does not threaten me. Religion does not inspire me.

And...my heart is not deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it, nor am I a worm or the cream of the crude as told in college.... after all!

So.....don't ever judge my experience with religion, scripture, church, leaders, lessons learned, thoughts, intent of my heart, disappointments, observations, realizations, hopes of the past and even naive beliefs others poured into my head before I grew up, or my sincerity. That would be a big mistake on your part.




Byker Bob said...

11:23, you can't possibly hold him accountable for not being able to distinguish between two anonymous posters who are apparently trying to make the same argument.

There's really no excuse for failure to use a screen name. If you are sharp about it, nobody's going to be able to identify you, and people can track which poster says what so responses can be appropriate.

It's a very rare occasion that I would take an anonymous poster seriously. Too many manure stirrers attempting to mess with people's heads with their drive-by posts have already spoiled that.

Ian Boyne (pastor), members of the Kitchen family, and members of the Scarborough family all actually sign their posts. Why can't you at least use a screen name?

BB

Byker Bob said...

Lighten up on Dennis, folks. He's just trying to make sense of it all as we all have done.

BB

Anonymous said...

Dennis says 'try not to judge my sincerity.'
On the contrary, I have a God given duty of care to do my best to judge the character and sincerity of every one I come in contact with. People can enrich my life, but they can also injure me. Hence the responsibility to evaluate those around me. Christ did the same with his 'beware of the Pharisees...' Christ would have spent time observing and pondering about these people.
Evil people by contrast, want to be morally invisible to potential victims so that their crimes can avoid detection. Which is which judging people is culturally frowned upon and in the church slivers, punished with verbal abuse.
However a moral blank check is not a right. Peoples behaviour and character are not above moral assessment.

A person of good character does not fear moral assessment. On the contrary, he/she welcomes it.

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:54 Work on the beams in your own eyes before you get all righteous over others

Anonymous said...

9.31 AM
That is a common mis-applied scripture thrown at people who discern the evil of others. In case you missed it, you passed moral judgment on me, the very thing you condemn me for.
There is no such thing as a right to a double standard. God does not give out, nor tolerate double standards.

Byker Bob said...

Thus proving once again that a self-righteous Pharisee needs no excuse to be what he is.

BB

Anonymous said...

BB
Now I see why God doesn't answer your prayers.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps some of you missed it.

Matthew 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Luke 6:38 .... For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

Notice, God does not tolerate a double standard. If you believe otherwise, your argument is with God rather than with me.

Byker Bob said...

I get answered prayers every day! And, today was no exception. Had an awesome and blessed day, although during morning prayer, I was aware of some ominous storm clouds on the horizon.

The real God never did and never will confirm the false prophecies of proven charlatans through the warm fuzzy feelings people imagine during their prayers. There's a really neat lesson Jesus taught about the Pharisee's prayer, and that of the publican. You might want to brush up. Might even help you "qualify".

BB