Jesus Crucifixion & Second Coming

[Greatest I am]

It takes faith to have reason. They are complimentary opposites.

Indeed.

The line is supernatural thinking.

Faith without facts is for fools.

Without faith, there are no facts.

Either just poor grammar or a lie.

Things have to make sense buddy. Take the by faith alone as compared to the by works argument.

Answer this truthfully and get a real truth.

Is faith a work of the mind?

[Alexiev]

Indeed.

The line is supernatural thinking.

Faith without facts is for fools.

Without faith, there are no facts.

Either just poor grammar or a lie.

Things have to make sense buddy. Take the by faith alone as compared to the by works argument.

Answer this truthfully and get a real truth.

Is faith a work of the mind?

How can you believe what you see with your own eyes if you don't have "faith" in the accuracy of your senses? How can you believe in the "facts" you read in an almanac if you don't have faith in the authorities who wrote it?

This is obvious. I shouldn't have to explain it.

[Eodnhoj7]

Liar.

If God is not truth and you are the God you claim to be, then why should you be trusted?

If God is only the creator of truth, then who is the creator of lies?

The whole of Job says that we are to thank God for all that is. Especially Job 2.3 that has God admitting that Satan moved him to do evil without a just cause.

If you meant me stepping up as my own God and master, and especially as final judge of things, then, as
the Bible is clear on, when it has Jesus saying that anything he says of himself cannot be trusted.

Like Jesus, I want you to think before agreeing to anything and take your just rewards. That is the esoteric Jesus and not the damned Armageddon one so many fools believe in.

And yet you claim sovereignty, by what account? You seem to be repeating an endless loop of individuality in your own mind. I think you fail to see that you are just a cycle...nothing more, nothing less. You claim truth and yet what? You do your own thing...so what.

[Fairy]

I think you fail to see that you are just a cycle...nothing more, nothing less.

I think you fail to see you are a recycle, not a cycle.

You are a bicycle.

[Greatest I am]

Without faith, there are no facts.

Either just poor grammar or a lie.

Things have to make sense buddy. Take the by faith alone as compared to the by works argument.

Answer this truthfully and get a real truth.

Is faith a work of the mind?

How can you believe what you see with your own eyes if you don't have "faith" in the accuracy of your senses? How can you believe in the "facts" you read in an almanac if you don't have faith in the authorities who wrote it?

This is obvious. I shouldn't have to explain it.

Faith is belief in the unseen by the eyes, stupid. I shouldn't have to explain it.

Go ahead and alter definitions to make false points.

[Greatest I am]

If God is not truth and you are the God you claim to be, then why should you be trusted?

If God is only the creator of truth, then who is the creator of lies?

The whole of Job says that we are to thank God for all that is. Especially Job 2.3 that has God admitting that Satan moved him to do evil without a just cause.

If you meant me stepping up as my own God and master, and especially as final judge of things, then, as
the Bible is clear on, when it has Jesus saying that anything he says of himself cannot be trusted.

Like Jesus, I want you to think before agreeing to anything and take your just rewards. That is the esoteric Jesus and not the damned Armageddon one so many fools believe in.

And yet you claim sovereignty, by what account? You seem to be repeating an endless loop of individuality in your own mind. I think you fail to see that you are just a cycle...nothing more, nothing less. You claim truth and yet what? You do your own thing...so what.

Be a cycle if you choose. I choose otherwise.

[Alexiev]

Either just poor grammar or a lie.

Things have to make sense buddy. Take the by faith alone as compared to the by works argument.

Answer this truthfully and get a real truth.

Is faith a work of the mind?

How can you believe what you see with your own eyes if you don't have "faith" in the accuracy of your senses? How can you believe in the "facts" you read in an almanac if you don't have faith in the authorities who wrote it?

This is obvious. I shouldn't have to explain it.

Faith is belief in the unseen by the eyes, stupid. I shouldn't have to explain it.

Go ahead and alter definitions to make false points.

Dictiojary .com chips in:

. 1. confidence or trust in a person or thing.

2. belief that is not based on proof.

Who is "altering derinitions"? Hmmm.

"Unseen by the eyes"? As opposed to "unseen by the ears"? Or "unheard by the nose"?

[Eodnhoj7]

If God is only the creator of truth, then who is the creator of lies?

The whole of Job says that we are to thank God for all that is. Especially Job 2.3 that has God admitting that Satan moved him to do evil without a just cause.

If you meant me stepping up as my own God and master, and especially as final judge of things, then, as
the Bible is clear on, when it has Jesus saying that anything he says of himself cannot be trusted.

Like Jesus, I want you to think before agreeing to anything and take your just rewards. That is the esoteric Jesus and not the damned Armageddon one so many fools believe in.

And yet you claim sovereignty, by what account? You seem to be repeating an endless loop of individuality in your own mind. I think you fail to see that you are just a cycle...nothing more, nothing less. You claim truth and yet what? You do your own thing...so what.

Be a cycle if you choose. I choose otherwise.

The self-endowment of power is a cycle.

[Age]

Indeed.

The line is supernatural thinking.

Faith without facts is for fools.

Without faith, there are no facts.

Either just poor grammar or a lie.

Things have to make sense buddy. Take the by faith alone as compared to the by works argument.

Answer this truthfully and get a real truth.

Is faith a work of the mind?

What is 'the mind'?

[Age]

Without faith, there are no facts.

Either just poor grammar or a lie.

Things have to make sense buddy. Take the by faith alone as compared to the by works argument.

Answer this truthfully and get a real truth.

Is faith a work of the mind?

How can you believe what you see with your own eyes if you don't have "faith" in the accuracy of your senses? How can you believe in the "facts" you read in an almanac if you don't have faith in the authorities who wrote it?

This is obvious.

But, you were asking clarifying questions, so what is, supposedly, 'obvious', here, exactly?

Did you not pose those clarifying questions, to be answered and clarified?

If no, then why did you pose 'those clarifying questions' in 'the way' that you did, here?

By the way, you could just 'test things', like, for example, senses and/or authorities, instead of just 'having faith' in them, only.

I shouldn't have to explain it.

But, there are plenty of things, in Life, which you adult human beings 'should not do', yet you, still, do.

Would there be any real issue if you did just explain the 'it', which is, supposedly, 'obvious'?

Also, and by the way you human beings really should not be believing things, but yet, here, you are believing things. Which, by the way, if you did not, then you would not 'need' 'faith', as it appears you believe you 'need', here.

[Greatest I am]

Without faith, there are no facts.

Either just poor grammar or a lie.

Things have to make sense buddy. Take the by faith alone as compared to the by works argument.

Answer this truthfully and get a real truth.

Is faith a work of the mind?

What is 'the mind'?

Thanks for the deflection and showing your low I Q.

[Age]

Either just poor grammar or a lie.

Things have to make sense buddy. Take the by faith alone as compared to the by works argument.

Answer this truthfully and get a real truth.

Is faith a work of the mind?

What is 'the mind'?

Thanks for the deflection and showing your low I Q.

Talk about presenting a perfect example of an attempt at deflection and an attempt at even deception itself.

you clearly asked if some thing is of the mind, but when asked what is the 'mind' you failed completely to use absolutely any intelligence at all and just answer the actual question.

What 'we' have, here, is another example of how quick 'these people', back when this was being written, were to make a claim, but when challenged and/or just asked a clarifying question how quickly they were to fail and falter absolutely as well.

[Greatest I am]

What is 'the mind'?

Thanks for the deflection and showing your low I Q.

Talk about presenting a perfect example of an attempt at deflection and an attempt at even deception itself.

you clearly asked if some thing is of the mind, but when asked what is the 'mind' you failed completely to use absolutely any intelligence at all and just answer the actual question.

What 'we' have, here, is another example of how quick 'these people', back when this was being written, were to make a claim, but when challenged and/or just asked a clarifying question how quickly they were to fail and falter absolutely as well.

All because you do not have a dictionary to us for known definition.

Fuck you and your deflections.

[Age]

Thanks for the deflection and showing your low I Q.

Talk about presenting a perfect example of an attempt at deflection and an attempt at even deception itself.

you clearly asked if some thing is of the mind, but when asked what is the 'mind' you failed completely to use absolutely any intelligence at all and just answer the actual question.

What 'we' have, here, is another example of how quick 'these people', back when this was being written, were to make a claim, but when challenged and/or just asked a clarifying question how quickly they were to fail and falter absolutely as well.

All because you do not have a dictionary to us for known definition.

The Fact that you can not, or will not, provide absolutely any definition for the 'mind' word, which you speak and write of, clearly shows and reveals a lot.

Fuck you and your deflections.

And, 'this' is meant to be a 'philosophy forum', where, to some, is 'a place' where 'logically reasoned discussions' were meant to be taking place.

[promethean75]

I don't know what all the fuss is about. The dude hardly suffered a day in his life. Okay, maybe one day, but that was totally on him. He knew the govs don't screw around with political agitators and social unrest makers and institution challengers and will hang their sorry asses on a telephone pole in a Roman minute. And yet the dude just wouldn't shut up.

Other than that, maybe an occasional blister or two because his Sketchers left much to be desired. The point is that you shouldn't pay attention to the sermons of someone who hadn't been around the block. They can't possibly know what they're talking about. This guy might as well had gone to the Jerusalem library and used their computer to log onto some philosophy forum and let all his cray out. That's basically what J was, i think. A 4chan boomer beta crashed out on Roman skibidi sigma gyatts with onika burgers.

https://youtube.com/shorts/Yeg5_o8SokY? ... c0ec4wMdHe