I offer my services to the Pope of Rome / The Vatican / of the Catholic Church on these grounds:
Job in the Bible IS the job to accomplish!!!
Jesus as Revenge of Jesus
-> Under Revenge of Jesus it may now be a duty to arm oneself with one or more guns and include an arsenal of other "deterrents".
The first commandment may imply to worship truth!
-> Under the line above, that we have a duty to STAY WITH the principles of Truth and live dutifully to God and life, incl. offspring!
It may also be noted that I'm an author of a whole new psychiatric theory!
I've also suggested the writing of the "Scientific [Hebrew] Bible"!!!
I've also made God/Deity belief for the World wide population by 4-fold solution to God, thus intellectually defeating Atheism in general!
There's an immediate DUTY for the Church to immediately embrace a two children / one child strategy and the widespread use of contraception pills and condoms _BECAUSE PLANET EARTH IS GOD'S CREATION IN ALL IT'S DIVERSITY and solemnly so!!! If we fail to /carry Earth as such/, we may infringe on God's will and benevolence to us!!! From the WWF it's easy to come to grips with animals in great distress over the whole World!
Whether it is common to think so or not, I must say that The Church of Christianity surely may speak against the suicide, but I think this is directed to a friend in hardship and not the friend's own wish to end it! Thus, the Church of Christ. needs / has the explicit duty to let these people seek their own ends, including that of the suicide. This may also entail that the Church now has the duty to facilitate suicides on the common basis, regardless! I mean, the Church can't sit and watch people being tortured to death and be silent about it or remain an authority of consciousness to people of character and of sound faith!!! This must be clear.
Even the very excellent philosopher Kant (1724 - 1804) seems to agree that suicide is something that must be allowed and that staying in life despite of hardship is praiseworthy, i.e., please look to his 80 pages moral text, a text inline with the critiques, I think!
Link to Wikip. on one of his critiques: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_of_Practical_Reason !
What I talk about here is: (1785) Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten)!
This is written on p. 45 in one version, where he explains the First principle!
Remember, that when you read this, you should separate "duty" from "natural inclination" so that every time you uphold a duty, you get "stars of respect" from your humanity, but when you stick to "lawful" natural inclination, pertaining to the Principle of Categorical Imperative that is the main message of this text it must then be clear, this must be allowed and in compliance with general humanity!
Because committing suicide does not mean that you destroy other people's ends, no, it means you end yours and leave others to their ends, which is commonly respected in this text!
Concerning "God's Lamb", I must say that I've been thinking about this and it stands fairly clear to me, over the Scientific Bible (minimally The Old Testament) that this must be a symbolic encouragement "to stay alert" and "not to fall into heathens' hands/power" and thus, by animal convention as guinea pigs and more, the God's Lamb is sacrificed. I think Christianity is getting better by the day now and I hope you find it beautiful too, even though our ancestors have been simpler than us today.
I am inspired and I may offer "a good deal". It's up to you, the readers of this to pass the correct judgments!!! That is, formally speaking, the services from above are offered on the basis of a consultant from "the far east", finding great reflections valuable to everyone, but in one Catholic Church with a theology that I'm not prepared to accept just yet. This also applies to most other Christian Churches. However, the Unitarian Church may be acceptable, but I'm happy with Scientology and I see no immediate need to offer more than insights at this point in time!
It should be obvious that these are very important to Christianity all over the World and I hope others follow up if my chances for doing this are lost or if I'm too encumbered with other matters, one way or another.
[More?]
Note: all of this is first published to Facebook over the span of some days.
Note2: one part is first published to Facebook, yesterday at 19:00(?) CET or so.
Note3: Norway isn't to be trusted toward its intellectual duties toward being compatible to The Catholic Church in terms of legal practice and more. This falls under this sentence: "I can't take this stupid country, Norway, anymore!!!"
Note4: Note: this has been written first to Facebook on my profile yesterday, around 6 PM CEST, that is on 23 June 2012 at 6 PM CEST. Look below for comment.
A little note on entailment of the Modal Argument for God, NDNID: It has really been entered earlier (by note on knowledge of Heaven under the NDNID document), but I just note it again that the possible God, ◊(Gx), _logically, entails the necessary God, □(Gx), insofar (or iffy, if you want) as true God has a place within the possible God, ◊(Gx)!!!
ReplyDeleteSome Biblical inspiration: "James 4:17": Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins. [The New Int. Version, 1984!]
ReplyDeleteNumbers 15:30 NIV
" 'But anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or alien, blasphemes the LORD, and that person must be cut off from his people." This one is very hard and good, I think!
Numbers 16:26 NIV
"He warned the assembly, "Move back from the tents of these wicked men! Do not touch anything belonging to them, or you will be swept away because of all their sins."
I've also quoted Ezekiel under Revenge of Jesus and it fits very well: When you have the idiot in front of you and you know you have the power and you get to exercise some moral character, I can only advise this for the good vigilante/pistolier:
The Classic Ezekiel 25:17, it goes,
"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee."
Ezekiel is likely to mean that the _protector_ of fellow person and of humanity! There is NO doubt to this point!
ReplyDeleteNew: I am inspired and I may offer "a good deal". It's up to you, the readers of this to pass the correct judgments!!! -> That is, formally speaking, the services from above are offered on the basis of a consultant from "the far east", finding great reflections valuable to everyone, but in one Catholic Church with a theology that I'm not prepared to accept just yet. This also applies to most other Christian Churches. However, the Unitarian Church may be acceptable, but I'm happy with Scientology and I see no immediate need to offer more than insights at this point in time!
ReplyDeleteAbove also, protector can also be written defender. The humanity is implied by "my brother's keeper" that has an equivalent in the French flag to Fraternity from a country, France, that adores their unifying force impersonated by Jeanne D'Arc, who has been known to be adamant in the Christian belief and to gather France under her King!
Not only is Job's book introduced by a tale (as known by the numbers), but this is probably the complaint over how the "many stories" appears as a diversion to many people on how to stay on the path to God and Heaven. Job's Book is there the job list to accomplish with respects of explanations and guidances like advise!
ReplyDeleteSo, while the Bible is under many people's conception complete, my consideration or my perception of this matter of Job's Book makes this untrue. The Bible ISN'T COMPLETE! The people of that time had many theological questions they wanted answers to!
ReplyDeleteI usually cite spending 400 hours back in the days of youth and adolescence for thinking about Jesus of Nazareth and in the end I threw it all away, but stayed with the words of Søren Kierkegaard and had a "marginal" view of Religion, throwing myself over the cut of a believer, (OVER/AWAY) FROM the agnostics, those who doubt in God. Not only has this "marginal" view stayed with me, but other life mysteries/"mysteries"/existential questions of the World have kept toward a God belief!
ReplyDeleteThe "70 raisins" of the Quran/Muslim faith may be an old-fashioned expression for (physical) monads and how one enters the Muslim Heaven and "meet other people" there! Therefore and by this, the ridiculisation of this now falls dead on idiots' sentiments and shortcomings of intellectuality!
ReplyDeleteLife, of course, being full-bodied grapes and raisins being the "water-less" fruits!
This makes the wise texts (the Holy texts of all religions) stand more firm and this also suggests that one should be careful by one's utterances of them in terms of "injecting" meaning to them!
First written to Facebook and another place here, under the Modal God argument, earlier... (I guess hours.)
Concerning "God's Lamb", I must say that I've been thinking about this and it stands fairly clear to me, over the Scientific Bible (minimally The Old Testament) that this must be a symbolic encouragement "to stay alert" and "not to fall into heathens' hands/power" and thus, by animal convention as guinea pigs and more, the God's Lamb is sacrificed. I think Christianity is getting better by the day now and I hope you find it beautiful too, even though our ancestors have been simpler than us today. Cheers!
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamb_of_God
Note: this has been written first to Facebook on my profile yesterday, around 6 PM CEST.
Not that I do not say that religions are now forever defended by Non-Dogmatic Intelligent Design in that it forces the opposition to prove ~◊G, not possible God, that is likely to put them away for good. But I have also additional news for religious people everywhere in the World: this notion against the "747 Jet" that they have launched against the Religious, "Against the Header of "Deductive Arguments", you know, I'm just very much AGAINST this misnomer of a header that says "Deductive Arguments". First of all, they never consider God with any charity, a failure in itself. Secondly, they fail to provide any clear deductive structures that are valid in and by themselves. Thirdly, for providing some fireman's work, I write: "(Important: not to say that Deductive Arguments are exclusive to the Arguments against God as such)". Fourthly, fx. for God to create the 747 airplane all by itself in one "miracle" of nature, they never bother to check in the Bible that it says that God can create this, any less than God can create pyramids, to roll back on technology a few steps! Again, these people don't CARE!
ReplyDeleteNote: I'm uncertain whether the anti-"747-jet" notion has been written to Wikipedia Talkpages first or Facebook. Either way, I have put it there in MY OWN NAME, not giving up the slightest intellectual work that I've made!
Cheers!
Finally, my search for the particular mentioning of God's Lamb pays off by: (The hunt has been...)
ReplyDeleteAny help from anyone, please, over the story in the Bible where a sheep/lamb/goat is gathered around by some people to "lay down the sins on" and for it to be sent into the desert? Does anybody know? It's not the most common quote of the lamb/sheep/goat in the Bible and that I may be looking for only a single reference throughout the Bible, all of its 1000 pages (appx.) or so. "The Bible is tough sometimes." LFOlsnes-Lea
Alright! Here is something: "The subject of this study concerns the activities of the high priest on the Day of Atonement; in particular, confessing the sins of Israel upon the head of the goat that was sent away into the wilderness (Lev.16:21)." by URL, http://www.israelofgod.org/azazel.htm ! LFOlsnes-Lea. Done!
First, some on Jesus (Weapon/Metaphorical): King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
ReplyDeleteJesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (John 14:6)
Second: It has been said that John of the Bible, by book of John, is /the/ most dubious book in the Bible and that he really may have been outside the Christian belief because he's disposition wouldn't be suitable for it! Agree?
Formal notice: I am strictly devoted to a kind of *commentary* to the original documents of the Bible, adding everything, from the Torah/Talmud, Bible (most comprehensive version, Ev. Luth, and Cath., some research), Quran and some matters from the Bahai faith. So, I do not touch nor "contest" (as if I could ever do that) any of these holy documents (to believers).
ReplyDeleteI think I withdraw on John as dubious and rather stick to the other "word" that says he "is second to Peter as Peter is first and both relate to Jesus as these" and Peter is known as Peter, the rock of faith. This means of course that John is second best "believer" to both Jesus and God. So this is it for now. Enjoy (your Bible)!
ReplyDeleteIn addition, John starts with the classic Jehovas' sentence: In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.(John 1:1) This is pretty strong wording in the Bible and I think it stands well as it does!
ReplyDeleteI'll just insert the 4-fold solution to a modal God, that makes a *logical argument for God*, not achieved earlier and that religious people necessarily don't need to enter the debate at all because their perceptions lie outside science no matter what! Also note that Galileo was persecuted for *stirring people up* and NOT for conducting science or holding scientific views, hence the Vatican's own Scientific section on their website. (Clearly, it doesn't hold all science or any good part of it, but if you read thoroughly you'll find that the Vatican *has undertaken studies, i.e., Science, for finding God in nature! Cheers!
ReplyDelete(By Facebook data: December 8, 2011 at 4:50 pm CET?, Under "New Horizons".)
Some preaching for today. I note that 1 Corinthians 3:16 - 3:17 reads:
ReplyDelete16 Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? 17 If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him; for God’s temple is sacred, and you are that temple.
Just put this with Plotinus and forget still that the above needs to be compatible with the Path to God, that you DO NOT replace God with yourself, falling prey to the Cardinal Sin of "Pride"/"Aloofness", the sin no. 7!
“In God, whose word I praise— in God I trust and am not afraid. What can mere mortals do to me?” Psalm 56:4 NIV..
More on the Bible as well, claim: instead of throwing oneself in to prove that Noah's Ark never could experience flooding like that, I claim instead that Noah's Ark is really the story-telling/metaphor of how human kind assumes at the time of writing or later the responsibility of all animals (and nature too, at the time of writing) and also has the responsibility to "ship" this to a better future, safely into the future, well-knowing that life can be a matter of "high seas" and "more calm seas" and that human kind now, at the time of writing controls fire and hunt animals effectively! Cheers!
To "man-up", valid for all men, women and children, may be the answer to "manna" of the Bible in such a way that inspiration from God becomes virtually a physical fruit that replaces food for a people marching through desert, starving!
For pre-emptive strike toward "any retard" out there in the World who thinks I do not understand the notion of (necessary) God as modal notion. Here are the 4 "components" more definitely put, in terms of religious belief:
ReplyDeleteNec. E -> Nec. God
(Nec. E biconditional Nec. God)
Nec. M -> Nec. God
(Nec. M bicond. Nec. God)
Nec. H (Heaven, "entailment") -> Nec. God
(Nec. H identity Nec. God)
Nec. D (definition of God) identity Nec. God)
These are all logical and /easy/ to deduce to *Nec. God!!!*
L.F.O.-L.14 October 2012 23:18
Btw, the cardinal sins are written in Proverbs of Solomon / Proverbs 6:16-19. The cardinal virtues stand differently.
L.F.O.-L.14 October 2012 23:24
Given some people's insistence (probably out of stupidity), the upside-down cross /is/ the Satanic Cross because it doesn't relate to Jesus and because to hang people upside-down is an act of torture and that people die from it, being in this condition after /appx./ 2 hrs, given the "rumours from the Dr. Mengele-Club"!
L.F.O.-L.14 October 2012 23:33
There are only 3 theological/Biblical cardinal virtues and they are "faith, hope, and love" and are found in 1 Cor 13.
The other 4 are developed by St. Aquinas and St. Augustine. Check for yourself. (From the philosophyblog777, also the time-stamps.)
"With the Pope of the Catholic Church and all the bishops and all clergy of the other religions", to defend your religious faith is to be /with/ a weapon, the physical force, for that common notion of old. I suggest that NOW is the time to make it a duty once again to arm oneself for this purpose! Arm yourself, buy the guns, the pistol. Defend your faith!
ReplyDeleteNote: this message to you, brothers and sisters alike, must be considered /most/ serious, of highest importance!
(Inspired by HM Queen of Britain, "defender of faith" to Canada, part of the Commonwealth(?).)
I've identified some other source you may lean to until the best reference from the Bible:
ReplyDeleteFrom
Should Christians Have Guns?
The Biblical Basis for the Second Amendment
by Dan Peters, D. Min.
Guest Editorial
The Biblical Evangelist
http://www.libertygunrights.com/ShouldChristiansHaveGuns.html
Note on the URL, most pleasingly! Then the substance: ...
The author here writes:
ReplyDelete"The right to keep and bear arms is not only a basic American right. It is a right given by God in this sinful world. It is assumed in the Bible."
- which is a wording for The Bible and belief in the Bible, as God's word, as a direct consequnce of staying alive and within protection by the weapon, "the sword", holding this belief. That is, "the sword" enables faith and "the reading of the Bible". Therefore this is "assumed", it's inherent!
He also writes:
"The right to family-defense is presumed from one end of the Bible to the other. The idea that
Christians should support the disarming of law-abiding citizens is *not* in accord with God's will for this age. The disarming of the lawful will only leave the streets and our safety in the hands of criminals and overworked police officers who cannot guarantee our safety."
I agree totally with this! Take care!
Take fx. (for garden of Eden to arise at all or to defend any peaceful place):
ReplyDeleteGenesis 3:24
New King James Version (NKJV)
24 So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.
If not the Bible verse directly, then this simple consideration: If you do not defend your life from the "retards" then your life goes away one way or the other! If you do not take this, then go ahead and waste YOURS!
ReplyDeleteThen one good verse to remember for this weapon purpose of self-defence:
ReplyDeletePsalm 149
King James Version (KJV)
149 Praise ye the Lord. Sing unto the Lord a new song, and his praise in the congregation of saints.
2 Let Israel rejoice in him that made him: let the children of Zion be joyful in their King.
3 Let them praise his name in the dance: let them sing praises unto him with the timbrel and harp.
4 For the Lord taketh pleasure in his people: he will beautify the meek with salvation.
5 Let the saints be joyful in glory: let them sing aloud upon their beds.
6 Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their hand;
Upon my other efforts to religiousness around the World, I bring also this (as happy they may always be, Jesus, God, the Holy Ghost combined):
ReplyDeleteI bring these good news today, despite general difficulties of society and I hope you like them:
Given this Foundation, I'd like to point out that religious faith now lies inside the fortress of 3 very hard notions:
Privacy - the Atheists bring NOTHING extra when it comes to religion and we are entitled the religious belief (always, insofar as this is commensurable with law and order, the vitae of human kind) because it's a private matter (or pertaining to specific/legal places of worship, the churches, temples, mosques or whatever, well, well, red in face or not, "synagogues"?)!
2nd, Modal God of Logics, the hardest academic notions, stand (almost) theoretically irrefutable to the Atheists! They are struggling with the logical questions nowadays! Ref.: also Kripke on Modal Logics!
3rd, the notions of the Cardinal Sins are so distasteful that it even shatters Kierkegaard's doubt be "Either/Or", witness, please, Se7en/Seven with Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman as "evil or evil" by the Cardinal Sins and add as Priest's final words: "with this [fetus in a box] I've brought (my) Wrath clean!" as the "Priest" has then conducted an insane wrathful war against the (hidden lust of his of the) Cardinal Sins, as Wrath over the other 6!
All in all, You are very defended, the fortress likely to stand forever! Good?
(You may take this also to the Humanism by https://www.facebook.com/RichardDawkinsFoundation?fref=ts .)
Also by a friend's story to another by Perfect Lovers Slash Perfect Strangers (also as "flow" and "oceans" by Deep Purple).
Best wishes,
Lenny Olsnes-Lea
More under "Seven" as the sins of distaste:
It, the notion of the seven cardinal sins, is also propelled by Kierkegaard's notion of "aesthetics" and as importance grow by the 3 steps, like rocket stages lifting a cargo to outer space, to the stars, so also is aesthetics giving power to ethics and aesthetics and ethics to religiousness! Note also that the seven cardinal sins are found /in/ the Bible "and not somewhere arbitrary", that is, the Bible gets the moral virtue for describing them overall and thus impels the readers (further) to believe in it, becoming (more) Christians, as the Bible makes the case for winning "hearts and minds"! /Therefore/, by logical deduction, "Seven" is a case for Christianity and other religions and not "something else"!
The text, under the science section of the Vatican, after they expanded it greatly, is by recommendation supposed to imply only the ethical, "non-Dachau-Nazi-Germany" SCIENCE. I.e., under the Vatican, the ethical requirements become much more STRICT so as to prevent ALL malice by conduct.
ReplyDeleteReading the Bible in serving the ecumenical world, all "whitelist religions", counting under 20(?), like JCIB, as "Moses II" metaphorically/"charicaturely":
ReplyDeleteI cite this evangelical duty of religions, this time Christianity, by Exodus 31:13:
"...for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may [only as speech here] know that I [am] the Lord [who] that doth sanctify you [i.e., keep you in God's grace to Heaven as you die].
Otherwise: "to bring God's salvation", "to bring the word of the Bible to all people so that they can turn to God and Heaven", etc. from the Bible, of course, one of them, King James (Bible of 1611), the Bible of Erasmus of Rotterdam, the Catholic Bible, so on.
One link: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+31%3A13%2CExodus+31%3A17&version=NIV .
The Determination of the Christian - The Confidence...
ReplyDeleteAllow me to write to you about the determination of the Christian. Now let's imagine that a genuine Christian wants to go to Heaven and works/lives toward such a goal. Further then, can the confidence of a Christian, the very deep feeling of "something out there", Heaven and God, be determined as confidence toward Heaven?
It seems common to believe, among the non-believers, that Christians are somehow hounded to Heaven by a fear of Hell. However, it's my opinion that Hell is rather remote and that the whole package of what Heaven represents, tranquility, goodness, etc., makes it so definitely worthwhile. If Hell may become a possibility, it seems rather the reality that all religious aspects are ignored altogether so that Hell is no longer a thought in the mind of a person "eligible" for such a place.
(I just put it in here! Rooting out hypocrite-Christians?)