Will the Tares please stand up.

Before I exit stage left, and turn the lights off, allow me to leave the spot light on the little sign sitting in my chair:

Just Google: The two seeds of Genesis 3:15 by Charles Lee Mange

The wheat will love it, but the Tares will throw tomato’s, cabbage, and eggs onto the 
stage with a loud, “BOOOOO.” The BOOOOO’s will be in vain, Domenic has left the
 building.

????

I'm as baffled as DK.

Read,  "The two seeds of Genesis 3:15 by Charles Lee Mange," and you will know which side of the fence you stand on. It is a free book on the net, or don't read it and stay baffled.
Nobody is trying to change what you believe, or where you stand.

My "bafflement" is your statement about leaving the stage.

dkchristi wrote:

My "bafflement" is your statement about leaving the stage.

Let me translate, “Leaving the Stage.”= Bye. It simply means, “All the stuff talked about on this forum has nothing to do with writing. Outside of writing, the only person on this forum I have anything in common with is Alice, and she is afraid to talk about what she believe because she fears the rest of you will put her down.
The rest of you have your own theories about God, and nothing will change how you think. I do not try to change how people believe because I do understand, Wheat is Wheat, and Tares are Tares.

I recall some years ago we had a member on the forum who called himself "Preacher".  He was truthful about his purpose and did preach.  Discussions about religion can be interesting and informative.  The backlash occurs when one thinks they have a handle on it and that their interpretation is the right one.   Comparative religious studies, a university course, was enlightening.  It was not a course that promoted any doctrine.  It was a study of the so-called "religions of the book".  (christianity, Islam & Judaism).  There are many religions, but these three are the main ones. 
Sharing how one feels about their take on religion is something to be valued.  Several have done that only to be criticized and when that happens, communication ends. 
Religious scholars continue to write books.  They often disagree on some things even when they are referencing the same source.  Their research goes beyond what many of us has the capacity to do.  Ending the conversation is a choice.  I respect those with faith that live their religion.

While I may see the world differently than another person, I value the other person for their points of view.  Mine change over time as my knowledge and experience grow.  I don't take personally the fact that my beliefs and ideas are challenged.  What I do take personally is someone saying that I am defective because my thoughts differ. 

Shelagh and I strongly disagree on several topics and agree on several others.  I don't discount her as a person.  I respect her research and the thought that goes into her beliefs just as I respect the research and thought that go into yours, Dom.  Your contributions to this forum are stimulating and thought provoking.  I do not believe that you are the only person who understands the secrets of the hereafter.  I believe man has searched for those answers and created his own since he began wondering - and will continue to do so - with as many answers as there are human beings on this earth.  Those with similar beliefs will gather together.

I can't imagine that Alice is afraid among us to state her points of view, which she has often done.  I don't see any attacking her ideas or her.

However, just as friends quarrel over time, this is a forum over time where friends may have issues on occasion or just not be in the right frame of mind for the post of the moment.  Time heals many things, including thoughts that differ.

Abe F. March wrote:

I recall some years ago we had a member on the forum who called himself "Preacher".  He was truthful about his purpose and did preach.  Discussions about religion can be interesting and informative.  The backlash occurs when one thinks they have a handle on it and that their interpretation is the right one.   Comparative religious studies, a university course, was enlightening.  It was not a course that promoted any doctrine.  It was a study of the so-called "religions of the book".  (christianity, Islam & Judaism).  There are many religions, but these three are the main ones. 
Sharing how one feels about their take on religion is something to be valued.  Several have done that only to be criticized and when that happens, communication ends. 
Religious scholars continue to write books.  They often disagree on some things even when they are referencing the same source.  Their research goes beyond what many of us has the capacity to do.  Ending the conversation is a choice.  I respect those with faith that live their religion.

Abe, I have said many times, I follow no religion. I believe in God, his son, our Lord Jesus, and the scrolls religions claim they built the bible from. Since the man made bible and the scrolls do not match on major issues, I have put the man made bible aside, and hold tight to the scrolls.
As to being one of those who believe to have a handle on the right interpretation, let me tell you the truth...God keeps nothing secret from his people...even a simple minded person like me can understand it.
Allow me to give you an example of just one major issue between the man made bible and the scrolls.
Eve has her first child Cain. The bible reads in Genesis 4: "I have gotten a man from the Lord."
Here is the same scripture in the scrolls: "And Adam knew his wife Eve, who was pregnant by Sammael (Satan) and she conceived and bare Cain, and he was like the heavenly beings, and not like the earthly beings, and she said, I have gotten a man from the angel of the Lord."

The scrolls also explain why satan wanted a child. Under Gods law, the first born male receives the full inheritance, in this case the whole earth. It is why Cain killed Able, for the inheritance. Satan missed the mark on just one point, the mixing of DNA...Cain did not get the inheritance. Gods law says not to mix DNA.

I know you believe nobody knows the truth. Abe, there are millions of us who do know the truth, and yes, there are billions who do not, and never will. People have been shown tons of proof there was a world flood, and still don't believe it...because they do not love God, or believe in his son Jesus...God says he blinds these to the understanding.
All people are free to believe, and follow what they want. We who do believe do not try to turn those who don't believe into believers...it can't be done, so we don't try.

I know you have said many times, "The scriptures are man made and not from a God." Abe, you are free to believe anything you want? 
I tell you this...One day this system will fall apart. Money will fall to nothing. Governments will fall to nothing. People will go wild. People will kill each other for food and water. I'm sure it won't be hard to tell the good guys from the bad.  The bad will be killing the good, because the good will not lie, steal, or kill another human. I have no idea when things will reach that point...but it sure looks like it's headed in that direction.

Dom said:
"Money will fall to nothing. Governments will fall to nothing. People will go wild. People will kill each other for food and water. I'm sure it won't be hard to tell the good guys from the bad.  The bad will be killing the good, because the good will not lie, steal, or kill another human. I have no idea when things will reach that point...but it sure looks like it's headed in that direction."


I can't argue with that statement.  I believe we are heading in that direction.  Environmental problems are already affecting our water.  Uncontrolled insecticides have begun to affect our food.  Our money is  not backed by anything but faith in the market.  It has no intrinsic value, but is an important instrument for buying and selling.  Although barter was good and worked, it had many limitations.  The elements of survival will become more important. One cannot eat money to survive.

History records people killing to survive.  Waging war on other countries may be the lessor of two evils when people make war on their neighbors.  The future appears bleak based on man-made causes.  It doesn't necessarily have to be so if we take decisive action to preserve life-sustaining elements.  Neighbor helping neighbor is not a new concept, but has been diminished by a greedy self-centered capitalist system.  Nothing will change overnight, but change it must for our survival.

Abe, it goes right back to the two seeds. Satans seed wants to kill Gods seed. God say unless he steps in no flesh(Gods people) will survive. There is nothing man can do to stop it. There is no place to hide.

When someone believes that they have the "truth" and everyone else on earth is a little shy of their marbles, I call that ostentatious and belligerent and conceited brain trash.
Love, Betty

Betty Fasig wrote:

When someone believes that they have the "truth" and everyone else on earth is a little shy of their marbles, I call that ostentatious and belligerent and conceited brain trash.
Love, Betty

Betty, from day one on this forum, all you have given me is insults. I tell you the truth betty, one day you will stand before a living God...I suggest you not give him your smart lip.

There is always a danger in speaking truth.  (Being honest)
According to the dictionary, Truth is: “the quality or state of being true or truthful; be frank."
Honesty is: "truthfulness".
Many will claim that they want to hear truth; however that is not always true.  They more likely want agreement on what they believe as truth.  Honesty has become rare.  I admire those who say what they truly feel.  I admire Betty for being honest.
Trying to please or appease can be dishonest.  It is much like being "politically correct". 
There is no question that Dom is being truthful about what he writes about his beliefs.  To be honest and to disagree causes a backlash.  Religion has a record of causing dissention and even wars.  Politics is another issue that creates dissention as we are witnessing with the on-going election campaign. When I make comments about Israel’s illegal occupation Apartheid and Genocide, I am usually attacked by those who seek to intimidate or shut me up.  Being called “anti-Semitic” is the usual first response.  I now accept that as a badge of merit in that I touched a nerve or an open wound.  I mention this only as an analogy.  I am not in tune with my American family on religious or political issues.  The only way to handle that is to avoid any discussion about these sensitive issues.  The mentality/psyche of feeling the need to be right or to win an argument is a sure way to lose.  Seeking truth is a noble quest.  Having an open mind sounds good, but is seldom the case.  Many seek confirmation of closely held beliefs and reject any input to the contrary.  Unfortunately, the person providing opposing or different input is attacked and even called names to shut them up.  A closed mind is not a mind receptive to learning.

Abe F. March wrote:

There is always a danger in speaking truth.  (Being honest)
According to the dictionary, Truth is: “the quality or state of being true or truthful; be frank."
Honesty is: "truthfulness".
Many will claim that they want to hear truth; however that is not always true.  They more likely want agreement on what they believe as truth.  Honesty has become rare.  I admire those who say what they truly feel.  I admire Betty for being honest.
Trying to please or appease can be dishonest.  It is much like being "politically correct". 
There is no question that Dom is being truthful about what he writes about his beliefs.  To be honest and to disagree causes a backlash.  Religion has a record of causing dissention and even wars.  Politics is another issue that creates dissention as we are witnessing with the on-going election campaign. When I make comments about Israel’s illegal occupation Apartheid and Genocide, I am usually attacked by those who seek to intimidate or shut me up.  Being called “anti-Semitic” is the usual first response.  I now accept that as a badge of merit in that I touched a nerve or an open wound.  I mention this only as an analogy.  I am not in tune with my American family on religious or political issues.  The only way to handle that is to avoid any discussion about these sensitive issues.  The mentality/psyche of feeling the need to be right or to win an argument is a sure way to lose.  Seeking truth is a noble quest.  Having an open mind sounds good, but is seldom the case.  Many seek confirmation of closely held beliefs and reject any input to the contrary.  Unfortunately, the person providing opposing or different input is attacked and even called names to shut them up.  A closed mind is not a mind receptive to learning.

Abe, you are correct, there is a danger in speaking the truth, but, there is also a danger in not speaking the truth.  If your house was on fire in the middle of the night, and a neighbor saw the fire and made every effort to awaken you with a warning, he/she would be doing the right thing by warning you. If the neighbor did not warn you, and people died in the fire, the neighbor would be guilty of murder.
Christians who have studied the scriptures have come to learn prophesies in the scriptures have come true, thus those yet to come can be trusted. The human family is in great danger of things taking place which we are warned in scripture by our God to warn people. We do not warn those who do not want to listen. Betty has shown she does not believe as a Christian, yet the love of her life is in great danger…she thanks friends for their support, but rejects any help a greater power could give. She rejects the God of the scriptures. God has shown he will let those who reject him solve their own problems.
Betty does not like anything I post, be it God or the weather…why she feels compelled to give nasty comment to all my post is clear to me, and I do understand who she is.
The God of the scriptures is real. He commands his servants to give warning to those who have eyes to see, and ears to hear a warning. It is a life or death warning.
You Abe have been called, “anti-Semitic.”   Here is a truth Abe, God is also “anti-Semitic” .
Here is a link, “A TRUTH HIDDEN FOR 2,700 YEARS.” I spoke of the Wheat and the Tares many time on this forum…two different DNA’s  Jesus warned his followers about. The Tares are the children of Satan, and the Wheat are the children of Adam. The Tares are identified in the link above.
Christians do not like warning people because of the lash back. I have grown beyond that. I can tell who is wheat, and who is Tare. The ling will also teach you how.

Dom, have you set yourself up as judge?  Judging Betty, her life or motives is not what I would expect from someone like you.  May I remind you of a biblical quote?
Matthew 7:1-3King James Version (KJV)
7 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
² For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
³ And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Abe F. March wrote:

Dom, have you set yourself up as judge?  Judging Betty, her life or motives is not what I would expect from someone like you.  May I remind you of a biblical quote?
Matthew 7:1-3King James Version (KJV)
7 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
² For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
³ And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Abe, you seem to always find it handy to use scripture you have always claimed are nothing but things written by man and not God.

As to judging: I shall use a term your side of the fence uses..."If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and flys like a duck...it would be safe to say, It is a duck."

Domenic, if someone disagrees with you they are attacking you.  You are entitled to your self satisfied belief that you are a biblical guru.  But, your vision and interpretation is just that...Your vision and Your idea of what the bible says.  I have no doubt that you have it to memory, but that does not make your idea of what it really means any more viable than mine.  You do not know me.
Abe has never posted scripture to back up his opinion.  I do not think any thinking person has to do that. 
Love,
Betty

Betty Fasig wrote:

Domenic, if someone disagrees with you they are attacking you.  You are entitled to your self satisfied belief that you are a biblical guru.  But, your vision and interpretation is just that...Your vision and Your idea of what the bible says.  I have no doubt that you have it to memory, but that does not make your idea of what it really means any more viable than mine.  You do not know me.
Abe has never posted scripture to back up his opinion.  I do not think any thinking person has to do that. 
Love,
Betty

Betty, I have read your past post. It is clear what you don't believe.
On this thread you posted, 
"When someone believes that they have the "truth" and everyone else on earth is a little shy of their marbles, I call that ostentatious and belligerent and conceited brain trash.
Love, Betty"


I have said nothing that is not in scripture. Your disagreement is not with me it is with Gods written word. I make no interpretation of scriptures, I let other scriptures do that.  You are free to believe anything you want. where it leads you will be your own doing. Do as you will. believe as you will.

I have been away and thus have missed this discussion.   No one  here has been mean to me and God has been very good to me.  We just got back from a long driving trip to see our family.  On the way a dear old cowboy held the door for us and said  "May the good Lord be kind to you."
I wish to extend this wish to all of you.   
God bless you all.

Dom says: "Abe, you seem to always find it handy to use scripture you have always claimed are nothing but things written by man and not God."


Dom, since your arguments are based on scripture, I thought it appropriate to use that source in rebuttal.

Based on the premise that God is our creator, did he not give us a brain to think?  Questioning what we read and hear is using those God-giving faculties.   Having someone else do the thinking for us is happening, i.e., Fox News.  History as taught years ago is found to be faulty and requires revision.  Political influence over what is written and taught is not new.  It occurred when the Bible was written along with what should be included and excluded.  With technology, they can build a robot that looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck.  Is it really a duck?  For those who watched Star Trek - the next generation they had the hollow (sp) deck and could create any situation (illusion) desired.  We can create illusions in our minds that seem real. 
Utilizing our capacity to THINK is important for our survival.  It is difficult to change the thinking of another, but it is a human trait to try.  We seek agreement/confirmation that our take on life is right.  Using our faculty to “think” we come to realize that the only person that we can control is ourselves.  Clichés like:  “Walk the walk” or “walk the talk” are meaningful if applied.  It is easy to point out perceived faults in others, yet fail to see the fault(s) within ourselves.  When those perceived faults are pointed out, we tend to rebel, to deny or to justify.  We want to be right even to a fault. 
To make a point, it is common to use a person or persons from history who demonstrated evil.  Hitler has been used as an example for many forms of evil.  Although men today may have some things in common with historical characters, similarities are not an exact match.

Thinking is mroe important than ever, IMV.  Questioning what we read and hear from past or present is something we can do.  We can't change the past.  We can only change how we act and react.

Abe F. March wrote:

Dom says: "Abe, you seem to always find it handy to use scripture you have always claimed are nothing but things written by man and not God."


Dom, since your arguments are based on scripture, I thought it appropriate to use that source in rebuttal.

If I gave the name and number of a scripture, would you believe it?

In lieu of a biblical reference about judging, let’s look at judgment based the laws of our land.
“Guilty until proven innocent” or “Innocent until proven guilty”
The law of our land is “Innocent until proven guilty”.  A judge listens to arguments from the prosecuting attorney and the defense attorney.  Often it is left to a decision by a jury.
Making a judgment about anyone, in this case Betty, without knowing all the facts is plain wrong.  Making assumptions should not be a basis for reaching conclusions.

Abe F. March wrote:

In lieu of a biblical reference about judging, let’s look at judgment based the laws of our land.
“Guilty until proven innocent” or “Innocent until proven guilty”
The law of our land is “Innocent until proven guilty”.  A judge listens to arguments from the prosecuting attorney and the defense attorney.  Often it is left to a decision by a jury.
Making a judgment about anyone, in this case Betty, without knowing all the facts is plain wrong.  Making assumptions should not be a basis for reaching conclusions.

Abe, cAn you answer a question, "Yes or No?"

Do you believe there is a God who created everything, and he has a son named Jesus?