could be

or it could be that they are a unit , comprised of parts, like a husband and wife are 'one'


either way, since Jesus does also refer to God in third person,,,I would not consider it definitive enough to be upset about

so, as I understand it, though we have our Lord Jesus Christ, we also have THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY

and our Lord Jesus Christ shared our LORD GOD with us

I would not get so upset about it.

AS I understand it 'Lord' is a title, like 'King' or even 'Father'


so God is the LORD of all lords, King of all Kings, and 'Father who art in Heaven'


and can be referred to as OUR LORD GOD

there are many scriptures where Jesus sits IN THE FLESH telling others about his 'Father' being our 'Father'

OR

telling them their 'FATHER' is in heaven, (not sitting before them, where he is speaking)

OR

calling out to HIS GOD

John 20:17 Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"


Matthew 23:9 And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?



so, as I understand it, though we have our Lord Jesus Christ, we also have THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY

and our Lord Jesus Christ shared our LORD GOD with us


I understand the belief in trinity as well, but I do not and would not hold the interpretation of something so easily ambiguous in importance,,,when it is the message of HIS word, that is the point

Matthew 23:9 And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.

Why is it such a rare thing to find a young Christian man who believes in this?

What is so important about December 25th!! For a Start Christ Jesus was not Born on this day, because it would be Winter in the North of the Equator!! The Shephard were out in the Fields, when Christ Jesus was Born!!

Matthew 2:1-12 tells us that Christ Jesus was a child (Matthew 2:9), when the Magi meet Christ Jesus, which was December 25 to give HIM (Christ Jesus) Gifts of Gold; Incense and Myrrh!! In Remembrance of this occasion Christian give Gifts on this day as did the Magi, when they meet Christ Jesus as a child!!

Drink of the Living Water Jesus speaks to the woman of Samaria about the gift of “living water”:

Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, “Give me a drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” 11 The woman said to him, “Sir, you have no bucket, and the well is deep. Where do you get that living water?…15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I may never be thirsty or have to keep coming here to draw water.” 16 Jesus said to her, “Go, call your husband, and come back.” (John

4:10-16)

“Living water” in this context refers to semen, which literally is the liquid of life. As Christ indicates, drinking of the “living water” provides a spiritual replenishment for the soul. When the woman asks Jesus where she can get this “water”, he tells her to fetch her husband, clearly with the intention of instructing her on how to fellate him and swallow his semen.
Source

Christian “Eucharist” (Sacrament / Communion) Founded in Ancient semen-drinking Rites


Wow ...I did not know Jesus instructed in semenology ...can anyone tell me ... Is this a hoax

Getting back to the original topic, What the Apostle Paul says in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 is quite explicit:

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

A footnote in the ESV states, "The two Greek terms translated by this phrase [practice homosexuality] refer to the passive and active partners in consensual homosexual acts."

One would have to do all sorts of mental gymnastics to conclude that God hasn't condemned consensual homosexual acts as being sin.

The fact that all have sinned doesn't give one biblical license to accept a particular sin in order to have another person's approval.

how come the women on these dating sites are mostly scammers wanting money from a guy where are the real women that are real women I just wanted to meet a woman for a guy same as a guy someone answer me that question

I just have to add that I find it amazing that, in order to defend God, you are forced to focus on the difference between the words "murder" and "kill." Particularly since the original writings were in Hebrew to start with!

Did you even read my post? Fine...here's the rest of the definitions of that word that you overlooked:

Strong's Number: 7523 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
xcr a primitive root
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Ratsach TWOT - 2208
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
raw-tsakh' Verb
Definition
to murder, slay, kill
(Qal) to murder, slay
premeditated
accidental
as avenger
slayer (intentional) (participle)
(Niphal) to be slain
(Piel)
to murder, assassinate
murderer, assassin (participle)(subst)
(Pual) to be killed
NAS Word Usage - Total: 46
killed 1, kills the manslayer 1, manslayer 18, murder 7, murdered 2, murderer 12, murderer shall be put 1, murderers 1, murders 1, put to death 1, slew 1

Obviously, your use of precision word defining here is a waste of time, as the word has too many variations of meaning to allow for you to build your paradigm upon such a conveniently narrow definition of "ratsach."




I told you that there was no point trying to hit me with that "old covenant vs. new covenant" line here, as the "thou shalt not kill" quote came from the OT, and it was God telling them that, then telling them soon thereafter to begin wholesale slaughter. Therefore, whether it was Old Covenant or New Covenant is again irrelevant to the point at hand, i.e. God is here depicted as a capricious tyrant who tells his minions not to murder/slay/kill/cause people to cease breathing, etc., then soon thereafter commands the same minions to murder/slay/kill/cause people to cease breathing. It's the same god issuing the orders, right?
Once again, I maintain that an All-knowing God would have employed the proper covenant in the first place, rather than toss the first one aside at some point in favor of a "New and Improved" model.



And, the very Law that God supposedly gave the Israelites said that they were not to take the life of another. Right before Yahweh threw it out the window and told them to take the lives of MANY others.

It would be great if Yahweh could have made up his mind about certain things, and then very clearly communicated his decisions to his minions, the first time. Before lots of people were supposedly hacked to bits. Particularly since I have to imagine that a bunch of former slaves probably weren't educated well enough to be able to parse words like we can, and would presumably have needed to have things spelled out very clearly.

This would also have obviated the need for an army of apologists down through the centuries to explain to we poor noobs what he "really meant."

I told you that there was no point trying to hit me with that "old covenant vs. new covenant" line here, as the "thou shalt not kill" quote came from the OT, and it was God telling them that, then telling them soon thereafter to begin wholesale slaughter. Therefore, whether it was Old Covenant or New Covenant is again irrelevant to the point at hand, i.e. God is here depicted as a capricious tyrant who tells his minions not to murder/slay/kill/cause people to cease breathing, etc., then soon thereafter commands the same minions to murder/slay/kill/cause people to cease breathing. It's the same god issuing the orders, right?
Once again, I maintain that an All-knowing God would have employed the proper covenant in the first place, rather than toss the first one aside at some point in favor of a "New and Improved" model.

GOD is real, wake up people? Suffering and pain is a education, for those who truly matter.

If I had a chance to actually meet "God" face-to-face and ask "Him/Her/It" any question, here's what I would ask:

"Hey God, if that's what you really are, why have you put me here? Why did you have me born on March 24, 1980, into a life that YOU KNEW I would never be anything? Why have you given me a life in which I serve NO useful purpose, where there exists NO woman for me to mate with, a life in which you knowingly don't create or provide me ANY means with which to obtain them, all while expecting me to be happy-dappy dippy **** every day that I suffer emotionally and DEMANDING that I "worship" you, BLINDLY, and giving me ABSOLUTELY ZERO acknowledgement of EVER hearing ANY prayers I send to you? Why have you made me this broken, very cynical, EXTREMELY BITTER!, mentally disabled, lonely, useless pile of garbage and put me in a world, in a life where no one wants me, no one really loves me and, if killed, would never, ever be missed? Did it not once cross your mind that you might have been making A BIG MISTAKE in putting me here in the first place? Was there not once ANY moment, in all of your all-seeingness, in all of your all-knowingness, where you genuinely and honestly questioned whether putting me in this place at this time was a really good idea? Was there no point at all in ANY of your "creating" where you thought, even if only briefly, even if only once in passing, that doing this would actually result in YOUR CREATION, THAT WHICH YOU GAVE FREE WILL TO, OPENLY REJECTING POSITIVELY EVERYTHING THAT RELIGION HAS TRIED AGAIN AND AGAIN, AND FAILED EACH AND EVERY TIME, TO MAKE THAT CREATION BELIEVE IN YOU?! You made me, and I hold you AT LEAST half accountable for my UTTER FAILURE at being what you designed me to be! I blame YOU, GOD, CREATOR OF AN ENTIRE UNIVERSE, for FAILING me and COMPLETELY DESTROYING ANY FAITH I MAY ONCE HAVE HAD IN YOUR ACTIVITIES!! HOW DO YOU PLEAD?!! WHAT HAVE YOU TO SAY FOR THIS?!! I DON'T CARE IF YOU DESTROY MY SOUL!! I HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN OR LOSE!! I SEEK ANSWERS!"

...Unreasonable? Maybe, but this is how I feel. No words shall be minced. Peace to all this coming Christmas.

Hey God, if that's what you really are, why have you put me here?

Why did you have me born on March 24, 1980, into a life that YOU KNEW I would never be anything?

Why have you given me a life in which I serve NO useful purpose,

Well, I don't know what happened there. I tried to edit my last comment in order to explain a point that I thought was relevant to our discussion, Cowboy, but it's not showing up. I guess the time allotment for editing ran out.

What I said was that the Hebrew word "ratsach," translated "kill" in Deuteronomy 5:17 and Exodus 20:13 in the KJV, is often translated as "murder." I just couldn't resist quoting the KJV in order to mess with you.

In any event, in case you don't know, the Hebrew language is a very expressive language and so many Hebrew words have a wider range of meaning than most English words. Such is the case here. "Ratsach" can mean "murder, kill, manslaughter, unintentional killing, accidental killing", etc. With this in mind, your efforts at parsing out the meaning you want, and then arguing the case from that perspective, is a waste of time. The word just covers too many different shades of meaning for that.

So...yet again, we are back to the old translation issue, and my contention that God would've utilized a better method of getting his point across.

The vast majority of the cases of genocide of Christians of which you speak were carried out by people of other religions, not atheists. So, Lazarus' point still stands.



Hmm. The god that said "thou shall not kill" also commanded Israel on multiple occasions to slaughter every man woman and child in whatever city they happened to be invading at the time. Here are a couple of examples, among many that I could cite:

Deuteronomy 20:16-17

"16 But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee:"

1 Samuel 15:2-3

"2 Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.
3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***."

I guess he didn't really mean it after all.

And, please don't try to tell me that I have to "keep things in context, and that this was part of the old covenant, etc." You specifically said that "the God that said 'Thou shalt not kill' means just that." And, "thou shalt not kill" comes straight out of the OT, specifically Exodus 20:13, and Deuteronomy 5:17.

Also, please don't bother making excuses for God along the lines of, "Well, in Deuteronomy 20:18, God explained WHY he was commanding the deaths of the Canaanites. It was so they couldn't mislead Israel into worshiping false gods." Or, "There is a difference between murder and execution, my friend. When God said 'thou shalt not kill' he was referring to murder, not God-decreed execution." I've heard these excuses before. In the first place,"Thou shalt not kill" is about as straightforward as you can get. If God actually meant to say, "Thou shalt not murder, but you can and will execute whomever I command you to execute," then that's what he should have said in the first damn place. But, he didn't.

Second, why would this All-loving god, who would centuries later command his worshipers to reach out to people of other nations and faiths and try to peacefully convert them through a ministry, here decree that his worshipers march in and mow these people down like wheat, without even trying to convert them? I can understand why folks like Marcion believed that the god of the OT was a separate entity from the god of the NT.

Finally, isn't it a crying shame that, despite the supposed slaughter of thousands of men, women, and children in Canaan (Assuming for the sake of argument that this actually happened, which I doubt.), Yahweh's block-headed minions still ended up falling prey to worshiping other gods, anyway? Not only because of the obvious tragedy of all those people killed for nothing, but also because this prompted Yahweh to ***** about it incessantly throughout the OT. If Israel hadn't succumbed to false worship so much of the time, the OT would've been about a fourth as long and much less repetitive and boring.

That's another thing, atheists don't go around killing people because they believe in god but many have died over the centuries at the hands of religious fanatics. Apparently thou shalt not kill unless in the name of god, lol.

Sorry, but I'm not the one who has this whole situation mixed up. Because I don't have a sacred cow to defend.



Once again, you are forced to play games with semantics in order to defend Yahweh. The character known as Satan was, according to the story, an angel, regardless of where he was hanging up his wings each night when these events took place. Furthermore, where do you come up with the idea that Satan was kicked out of heaven prior to the events in Eden?

Job 1:6-7
6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.7 And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

Besides, whether or not Satan's "Employee of the Month" card had been revoked at the time he screwed with Eve's head, is irrelevant to my point. The point is that Satan, who was an angel to start with, and thus a far more advanced form of life than a human, was like a fully grown adult in comparison to Eve. So, God was at best negligent for allowing an adult to tempt a toddler. (Relatively speaking.)



Still more semantics. God created the angels. Therefore, he gave them life, which makes him their father. Ergo, they are his children. Besides, as I said, this is irrelevant to the point. But, I suspect that you know that anyway. You have to muddy the waters in an attempt to save God's rep.



No, it doesn't. See my comment above.



That depends upon the level of emotional maturity that the child possesses. For example, juveniles are generally not punished as harshly as adults for committing the same crimes, because they do not possess the same level of emotional maturity.



Well, according to most Christians, if I don't toe the GODfather's line, I will be obliterated one day. That not only constitutes a punishment, but it's a real dick punishment, too, since I'm not the one who ate the damn fruit to start with.



What?! The last time I checked, I was very much a mortal.



No, I'm not upset about those things, because that's just the nature of the world, and the truth is, your god had nothing to do with any of it. However, I am arguing the point from your perspective for the sake of argument. And I maintain that we shouldn't have to experience any of the negative consequences of God's judgment against Adam and Eve, because we had nothing to do with it. It is very unloving of Yahweh to punish us in any way for what they did.



Well, now that you mention it...YES! I think it was a total DICK move on Yahweh's part to decree that all women, for all the centuries past should have to suffer the extreme pain associated with passing something the size of a small watermelon through a bodily orifice not nearly large enough to allow a small watermelon to pass through just because he was feeling really pissy with Eve.



Which end of the scroll would you like for me to start with?



Again with the semantics. Can you not see that the point is that the sacrifice was unnecessary? The book of Hebrews says (I don't have time to quote it at present.) that Jesus presented the value of his shed blood to God after he took the stairway to Heaven, right? I maintain that the whole bloody sacrifice ******** is a hold-over from other ancient myths/rituals, and that it is a ridiculous notion to believe that GOD "had" or even "allowed" his son to die a horrible, bloody death in order to pay back a debt to himself!!

And, if we were talking about any other deity doing the same thing, you would agree with me.

Once again, you are forced to play games with semantics in order to defend Yahweh. The character known as Satan was, according to the story, an angel, regardless of where he was hanging up his wings each night when these events took place. Furthermore, where do you come up with the idea that Satan was kicked out of heaven prior to the events in Eden?