»MATRIX and RELIGION«

StaticAge wrote:

Rebellion is permitted then. Even in the biblical account, God allows perfect man to degenerate into that sinful condition- he permits rebelious mankind to populate the earth. It is ours as free willed creation to accept control or not.

Rebellion is permitted to exist, while on this earth. However, one must be prepared to reap the consequences when he leaves. Every man will degenerate and has degenerated into a sinful condition. Therefore, in order to not reap the consequences of our actions, there must be MERCY. God shows us his mercy through the person of Jesus Christ. This is our atonement. We cannot become perfect on our own, we need to rely on someone who was.

StaticAge wrote:

Granted, there may be consequences for choosing to reject a system of control. If I murder someone else, I may be found out, arrested and placed in a prison, or my own life might be taken as punishment. Nevertheless, I STILL have the freedom to plan it out and do it anyway- its MY choice.

Yes, it would be your choice to murder someone... however, if you do you must take the just consequences... being killed. No one should be left to think that he can murder if it outweighs the consequences he will recieve for his actions. So, yes, the person is free to do whatever, but must reap just consequences.

StaticAge wrote:

Truth is truth, its golden. If something is corrupt, it is not true. It cannot be created through government or religion, at best it can only be reflected; but a reflection is only an image, it is not the actual truth.

This is why I encourage you to look through the corruption to find the truth. There is only one truth. It is that we need Jesus Christ. Nothing man can do or create can reach perfection. We are degenerate beings in need of a savior. Sure, rebellion is "permitted" on this earth for a while. But, when our time is up, can God accept corrupt beings? No. He can only accept that which is perfect. Therefore, we need Christ to stand in our place.

A righteous man and a wicked one both have the same end in death. The only difference is a religious man believes he may live again. Contrary to what you say, a man can kill another and never be found out by earthly authorities, or can even be aquitted by them if he was. If the person never believed in God anyway, then when he dies, he dies, accepting what he already thought would happen without any further conbsequence.
Also, my point is that if religion or government is corrupt, its untruthful. There is no use in searching for food in the garbage.

StaticAge wrote:

Also, my point is that if religion or government is corrupt, its untruthful. There is no use in searching for food in the garbage.

Should we think, since most religions we see are corrupt, that there was never a truth which was perverted? Should we think, because all government systems are corrupt, that we shouldn't have government? Obviously not. Is the idea of being controlled corrupt? No. Humans should be controlled. Any decent form of government is built on this truth. However, what should humans be controlled by? Humans? No, to be controlled by humans is to have the same problems which exist in a state of anarchy. This is why the founding fathers wrote a constitution. It is an unchangeable document to which all are bound. It is a non-human, truthful (hopefully), standard to which everyone is held.

stinkz wrote:

StaticAge wrote: Also, my point is that if religion or government is corrupt, its untruthful. There is no use in searching for food in the garbage. Should we think, since most religions we see are corrupt, that there was never a truth which was perverted? Should we think, because all government systems are corrupt, that we shouldn't have government?

Did I ever say that there was no truth?

Quote:

Is the idea of being controlled corrupt? No. Humans should be controlled. Any decent form of government is built on this truth.

Why? What proof do you offer? Its only opinion, and a mistaken one at that.

Quote:

However, what should humans be controlled by? Humans? No, to be controlled by humans is to have the same problems which exist in a state of anarchy. This is why the founding fathers wrote a constitution. It is an unchangeable document to which all are bound. It is a non-human, truthful (hopefully), standard to which everyone is held.

You miss the entire point of the whole bible you so pompously think you stand for.

StaticAge wrote:

Did I ever say that there was no truth?

No, you didn't... which was surprising. There seem to be few who admit that truth exists outside themselves.

StaticAge wrote:

Why? What proof do you offer? Its only opinion, and a mistaken one at that.

What opinion did I state? That government exists to control people? I thought that should be self-evident.

StaticAge wrote:

You miss the entire point of the whole bible you so pompously think you stand for.

Thank you for showing me how ridiculous your arguments are. I guess I should just take your word on it and assume that I am "missing the point" of the Bible because you say so. Tell me, if you have read it, what would you say that the main point of the Bible is?

Besides, I never have claimed to be standing for the Bible. If you guys see flaws in me, it does not mean there are flaws in the Bible. I am only standing for what I have found to be true. I could be right or wrong.

stinkz wrote:

What opinion did I state? That government exists to control people? I thought that should be self-evident.

No, you said humans need to be controlled, calling it a truth. I quoted it right there, so dont act ignorant.

Quote:

Thank you for showing me how ridiculous your arguments are. I guess I should just take your word on it and assume that I am "missing the point" of the Bible because you say so. Tell me, if you have read it, what would you say that the main point of the Bible is?

The whole point of the bible is about the issue of God's sovreignty, from the garden of eden, to the testing of job, to the development of a chosen nation for God, which foreshadowed the reign of Christ as king over all the earth. The bible clearly points out that it is to God alone that obedience is owed. You herald the us constitution as a sort of sacred document- as if! The majority of the principles the us was founded on had more to do with free thinking and philosophy- the same things you railed against earlier.

Quote:

Besides, I never have claimed to be standing for the Bible.

Liar:

Quote:

I came from a Christian background, so naturally I would tend toward Christian beliefs. However, I came to a point in my life where I very much longed to believe that rules and morals were all just "made up" so I could do my own thing. However, my conscience wouldn't let me.

StaticAge wrote:

No, you said humans need to be controlled, calling it a truth. I quoted it right there, so dont act ignorant

Well... without any control, there would be anarchy. Is this freedom?

StaticAge wrote:

The whole point of the bible is about the issue of God's sovreignty, from the garden of eden, to the testing of job, to the development of a chosen nation for God, which foreshadowed the reign of Christ as king over all the earth. The bible clearly points out that it is to God alone that obedience is owed. You herald the us constitution as a sort of sacred document- as if! The majority of the principles the us was founded on had more to do with free thinking and philosophy- the same things you railed against earlier.

That was a nice stab at the point of the Bible, I'll give you some credit. However, the main focus is really on the redemption of mankind.
I never said the constitution was a sacred document. But thank you for putting words in my mouth. I said it was an unchangeable standard to which everyone could be held, and that is why it works so well.

StaticAge wrote:

Liar:

Just because I admit to coming from a Christian background doesn't mean that I am standing in place of the Bible.

stinkz wrote:

Well... without any control, there would be anarchy. Is this freedom?

As I pointed out earlier, to say that without control then anarchy would exist is conjecture and opinion. Nice attempt to dodge when you cant admit thats all it is, but I would submit that true freedom must come from exercising free will, not from imposed force.

Quote:

That was a nice stab at the point of the Bible, I'll give you some credit. However, the main focus is really on the redemption of mankind.

Really? So then the focus of the bible is on man, and not God? In the bible, its not only MAN who rebelled against God but also the spirit realm. The first thing Jesus taught his followers to pray was for God's name to be sanctified and his kingdom to come- both of which are of much greater concern than mankind's salvation or redemption. Redemption is merely one facet of what God's sovreignty and kingdom are presented as taking care of.

Quote:

I never said the constitution was a sacred document. But thank you for putting words in my mouth. I said it was an unchangeable standard to which everyone could be held, and that is why it works so well.

First of all the Constitution IS changeable- thats why we have the Supreme Court to constantly change how it is interpreted. Further, people have added cluases and amendments to it throughout its existence. Secondly- what "truth" does it express to you? I would imagine that if you believed in God the only real truth then would be godly, not man-made governments (which according to the bible are in opposition to God)

Quote:

Just because I admit to coming from a Christian background doesn't mean that I am standing in place of the Bible.

You said you didnt stand FOR the bible, not in place of it.

stinkz wrote:

Well... without any control, there would be anarchy. Is this freedom?

As I pointed out earlier, to say that without control then anarchy would exist is conjecture and opinion. Nice attempt to dodge when you cant admit thats all it is, but I would submit that true freedom must come from exercising free will, not from imposed force.

Quote:

That was a nice stab at the point of the Bible, I'll give you some credit. However, the main focus is really on the redemption of mankind.

Really? So then the focus of the bible is on man, and not God? In the bible, its not only MAN who rebelled against God but also the spirit realm. The first thing Jesus taught his followers to pray was for God's name to be sanctified and his kingdom to come- both of which are of much greater concern than mankind's salvation or redemption. Redemption is merely one facet of what God's sovreignty and kingdom are presented as taking care of.

Quote:

I never said the constitution was a sacred document. But thank you for putting words in my mouth. I said it was an unchangeable standard to which everyone could be held, and that is why it works so well.

First of all the Constitution IS changeable- thats why we have the Supreme Court to constantly change how it is interpreted. Further, people have added cluases and amendments to it throughout its existence. Secondly- what "truth" does it express to you? I would imagine that if you believed in God the only real truth then would be godly, not man-made governments (which according to the bible are in opposition to God)

Quote:

Just because I admit to coming from a Christian background doesn't mean that I am standing in place of the Bible.

You said you didnt stand FOR the bible, not in place of it.

stinkz wrote:

If you guys see flaws in me, it does not mean there are flaws in the Bible.

Are there flaws in the bible, stinkz?

Christianity is an interesting Religion. But since the Treatise of the Bible itself has been subjected to palimpsestic revisions, the Bible itself , "Ceteris paribus", can no longer be viewed as ambulatory in nature. But most religions are rhizometric in structure, their surface illusions mask their true meanings and intentions. While they allude to extend "a coelo usque ad centrum" in scope, they are usually basic methodologies of political control and dominance with only a moiety of their full rationale ever explained to the masses. Ideologues of most religion's "Modus Operandi" seem to have been subjected to some form of abbacinare.
Unfortunately, most Religious doctrines seem syllogistic and are not "Volenti non fit injuria."

Maybe some day I will look into religions in a more serious context. ;p

Re-reading my post, while I think the post "Res ipsa loquitur", I probably used too much Latin. But as we used to say in Latin Classes:

Latin is a Dead Language
It's Plain enough to see
It killed off all the Romans
And now it's killing me.

;p

Though your point is masked in ridiculousness to try to sound educated, you were right on one thing. Many religions do mask their true teachings in order to become a political method of control. Of this there is no doubt. However, true Christians rejected the politicizing of their religion during the Reformation, when many of the truths of the Bible began to come out again. We now have very accurate texts translated from the original greek with which they were written.
Though the religion has been corrupted and used for political control, it's true teachings have survived and are now just being touched upon.

Educated, no I'm a noob that 1t starting looking into the matriz about 2 weks ago,


ROTFL

I could never attain entrance to a medium/higher level if I tried,


Rgw rest I made up


Anata wa Dami desu ne....

Hen desu

hmm... somehow i missed statics post... but now i see that i didnt miss much.

StaticAge wrote:

As I pointed out earlier, to say that without control then anarchy would exist is conjecture and opinion.

Umm... do you know what the definition of anarchy is? It is the absence of a any form of political authority (system of control). So, my point stands.

StaticAge wrote:

Really? So then the focus of the bible is on man, and not God?

Our focus is to be on God, however, the Bible's focus was definately on man. It was written TO man in order that they might find redemption. The whole underlying theme is man's initial rejection and how God dealt with it through the ages leading up to the point where Jesus died on the cross and said "it is finished." God's redemptive work was completed through Christ.

StaticAge wrote:

First of all the Constitution IS changeable- thats why we have the Supreme Court to constantly change how it is interpreted. Further, people have added cluases and amendments to it throughout its existence.

I'm glad you feel you have "enlightened" me with this new information, but it was unnecessary. The POINT is that the document is a standard to which all people could be held. Why don't we just have a dictator? That would be a much more efficient system of government wouldn't it? The problem with that is that the dictator can easily become corrupt if not held accountable to a higher standard. This is what the Constitution acts as.

StaticAge wrote:

I would imagine that if you believed in God the only real truth then would be godly, not man-made governments (which according to the bible are in opposition to God)

you seem to like trying to interpret what you think I should believe, but, as should be expected, it is utter nonsense. Man-made governments are fallible, and always will be fallible. This can be seen by the very fact that there never has been a perfect form of government. However, does it say anywhere in the Bible that all man-made governments are in opposition to God? No. The Bible says that it is God that sets up nations and takes them down.

Let me rephrase that: to say that without control that a negative chaotic environment would ensue is conjecture and opinion. There are many who believe that under anarchy peace would result. In fact, one such person was Leo Tolstoy, who went so far as to suggest that Jesus Christ himself was an anarchist of this nature (not that I agree with that assesment, just to say all it is is an opinion, like yours)

Your failure to get the sense of the bible is not surprising, but as I said earlier, the sanctification of God's name and reputation, the issue of his sovreignty, and the cleansing of wickedness are decidely more important issues in the bible tham redemption. Even the question of integrity raised by satan in the book of job is subsidiary to the primary one in genesis, where God's name was profaned and disrespected. God's dealing with the nation of Isreal was over and over made clear the main reason was on the basis of God's holy name. God owes nothing to mankind- his kindness is undeserved. But its contrary to scriptural fact and a putting of matters in wrong perspective to view human salvation as if it were the all-important issue or the criterion by which God's justice, righteousness, and holiness can be measured. Like Jesus said- love your felowman as yourself, but God with your whole mind heart soul and strength.

The so-called higher standard that checks power of the government is the people, not truth as you claimed earlier. In fact, since the us government hinges on this mass of self willed people, then comparing it with a dictator and deciding that a government run by the people for the people is less corrupt, this actually lends credence to the possiblity that anarchy, or the total removal of government might thereby contribute to an even greater happiness by removing even more power and thus corruption. Not that I necessarilly agree on that point, but it shows a major flaw in your reasoning.

And actually, yes the bible DOES state clearly that all manmade governments are in oppostion to God. In fact, Satan offered Christ ALL the kingdoms of the world when tempting him. Further satan is called the god of this system of things and also called the ruler of the world. The bible also pictures the world governments as a wild beast and that satan granted it authority and power. Only one nation was spoken of as standing for God which was based on a covenant that according to the christian scriptures was broken by the people and further was fulfilled by the messiah. Jesus himself rejected acting as a ruler in an earthly government when the people tried to make him king. And all nations are foretold to actually wage war against God at armageddon.

Great, you can tell me stories about the Bible, and even point out truths in it. Don't expect to tell me something I haven't heard before. I agree that there is more to the Bible than redemption. However, who is the central figure of the Bible? What was the point of his life? The central theme is definately one of God's grace and mercy towards his creation. There is more to the Christian walk than salvation. But salvation is the starting/turning point. Going off talking about other points of the Bible won't change this fact.

StaticAge wrote:

since the us government hinges on this mass of self willed people, then comparing it with a dictator and deciding that a government run by the people for the people is less corrupt, this actually lends credence to the possiblity that anarchy, or the total removal of government might thereby contribute to an even greater happiness by removing even more power and thus corruption. Not that I necessarilly agree on that point, but it shows a major flaw in your reasoning.

Wow. Have you not been listening to a word I say? Your reasoning is the one that has anarchy meaning a state of peace, not mine. My whole point has been trying to show you what you refuse to hear. Humans need a standard to be held accountable to. Without a constitution, dictators will become corrupt. Without any form of government (anarchy) corruption and chaos rule.

StaticAge wrote:

And actually, yes the bible DOES state clearly that all manmade governments are in oppostion to God. In fact, Satan offered Christ ALL the kingdoms of the world when tempting him. Further satan is called the god of this system of things and also called the ruler of the world. The bible also pictures the world governments as a wild beast and that satan granted it authority and power.

Satan offering Christ the kingdoms of the world has nothing to do with your point. You seem to have like 20 Bible stories in your arsenal which you bring out whenever they suit your fancy. Going back to your original point from 2 posts ago, Satan having his reign on this earth does not mean that we cannot create a system of goverment that will work better than others.

StaticAge wrote:

And all nations are foretold to actually wage war against God at armageddon.

OK... I can see that I can no longer help you. You seem to think that you have a full knowledge of even the most difficult passages in the Bible. Just to warn you, before you can understand anything in Revelations, you must first have a keen knowledge of the Old Testament and an good understanding of the New. Stop basing your theology on the "Left Behind" series and do a little research for yourself.

stinkz wrote:

However, who is the central figure of the Bible? What was the point of his life? The central theme is definately one of God's grace and mercy towards his creation. There is more to the Christian walk than salvation. But salvation is the starting/turning point. Going off talking about other points of the Bible won't change this fact.

The central figure is God himself, and according to the bible (Ecl 12:13 for example) the point of human life is the same as all his creation- to give God glory. You can believe what you like I suppose, but no matter what you claim, you dont back any of it with evidence, only your own opinions and reasoning. But there is evidence that points to a different conclusion than you claim to have reached in the bible, and regardless of what I personally think of the bible or religion, I would think you would want to examine it more closely: Ps8:1,3,4; Ps 40:5-10; Ps:144:3; Mt 6:9,10; Isa45:9; Isa63:11-14; Eze20:8-10; Eze30:20-27,32; etc

stinkz wrote:

Wow. Have you not been listening to a word I say? Your reasoning is the one that has anarchy meaning a state of peace, not mine. My whole point has been trying to show you what you refuse to hear. Humans need a standard to be held accountable to. Without a constitution, dictators will become corrupt. Without any form of government (anarchy) corruption and chaos rule.

Again, further proof you dont know what you talk about. You may like to pretend you know it all, but if you had done ANY research on the topic of anarchy (even something as simple as looking it up in a dictionary) you would know that a second meaning of anarchy is a utopian society. So, if I'm not listening to what you say, maybe its for the best.

stinkz wrote:

Satan offering Christ the kingdoms of the world has nothing to do with your point. You seem to have like 20 Bible stories in your arsenal which you bring out whenever they suit your fancy. Going back to your original point from 2 posts ago, Satan having his reign on this earth does not mean that we cannot create a system of goverment that will work better than others.

How do you figure? If Satan is tempting Christ, how can he tempt someone with what isnt his to offer? I am quite fond of the stories in the bible, I have read it many times, and in fact I referenceded several different texts to make my claim (Matt 4:8-10; Joh12:31; Joh14:30; 1Joh5:19; Rev13:1; Rev16:14). Here's another bible story: Satan has had demonic princes over principal kingdoms of the earth- Dan10:13,20. You use none... and yet you offer your argument as somehow more valid in spite of examples I show you. Does your own logic take precedent over biblical scripture in your beliefs or are you incapable to use scripture to refute my view? In any case, based on facts, your argument is groundless

stinkz wrote:

OK... I can see that I can no longer help you. You seem to think that you have a full knowledge of even the most difficult passages in the Bible. Just to warn you, before you can understand anything in Revelations, you must first have a keen knowledge of the Old Testament and an good understanding of the New. Stop basing your theology on the "Left Behind" series and do a little research for yourself.

Do you really think you need to warn me about the bible? I thought the word was truth- is there a chance it might lie to me? Do you think that God wrote the bible so man can draw closer to him or to confuse and alienate him? You assume too much: first of all, I am not discussing theology, just the bible, and I never read a book series called "left behind". I have no idea what twists you place on the christain religion, so I dont base my arguments on assumptions about your faith, only what you claim your faith is based on- the bible, which apparently you either 1)dont know much about; or 2)think your own line of reasoning is superior.

I have no problem with whatever you want to do or believe, simply that I find it irritating that you spew so much self serving drivel on why everybody else's conclusions are inferior to your own. I know a lot about the bible; I have read it all my life. You think yourself so wise that you can tell everybody how wrong their own beliefs are, and what I find amazing is that you really offer NOTHING from which to provide any evidence of your own beliefs. All you offer is opinions (stated as though they were facts) insults, and your own self righteous patter. Its funny that someone who doesnt even share your beliefs can show you evidence from what you claim your faith is based on and you STILL never give it a second thought. So what can I say? I hope acting so piously makes you feel better about yourself.

I have seen how the human mind is designed to draw strenght from religious belief. It can make parents kill their children or cure a heroin addicted person.

I have tried to believe in many things, but as my thinking always concludes with logic and facts, I have found nothing to believe in. There are still many ways of thinking that would make me a more positive person, but I cannot find the strenght to follow them, and I have only my lack of belief to thank.

People like Stinkz have a belief that is so powerful that even the most basic facts, presented in a perfectly understandable way, are not able to make him see reason.

If there only was a way to use this kind of mental strength in a purely positive way.

First allow me to say that I was once one of those who thought that Zion was the "Real World", but after just recently watching The Matrix and part of Reloaded again (I plan on watching the rest of Reloaded later), my view changed to that of Zion NOT being the "Real World".

The following takes this point of view and is also not meant to start an argument concerning religion:

I believe that the idea of The Matrix being related to religion is a good one, but how about this?

What if the actual belief system/program is the Blue-tinted Zion?

Granted, the Green-tinted Matrix is a simulation of the "Real World" that WE(the movie audience) are living in right now.

That being the case, then one might say that all of the religions in OUR world, along with their key religious figure(s), might also represented in some way within The Matrix.

Each religion in OUR world could be a belief system/program within The Matrix and could have it's own Zion-like world to contain it.

This could mean that in The Matrix movies, we are only seeing the story of ONE of these worlds.

It would seem that the religion the Brothers happened to pick to be represented in these movies is Christianity.

Zion could possibly be thought of as being a representation of Heaven and "The One" could possibly be thought of as a representation of Christ.

The Prophesy is the story of "The One" and the guardian of this story is The Oracle.


What is the Matrix

StaticAge wrote:

You can believe what you like I suppose, but no matter what you claim, you dont back any of it with evidence, only your own opinions and reasoning.

I am sorry that you miss the point of the Bible. God is central to our existance as he created everything. However, what we humans need is a savior which can take our place and be judged. As for evidence, I need only the Bible. I encourage any unbiased person to read the Bible and look for a central figure, it is Christ and none other. The whole Old Testament is filled with prophecies and symbols of his coming. The New Testament is His story and teachings.

Umm... your very first example, Ecclesiastes 12:13, says that we should fear God and keep his commandments. However, if you finish the sentance by going on to verse 14 he gives the reason behind doing so, which says "For God will bring every deed to judgement, with every secret thing, whether good or evil." Now, you shall also note that in the New Testament (Romans 3:23) it says "for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" Right there the Bible tells us that no man can live up to the command given in Ecclesiastes 12:13 for all have sinned. We find the answer to this problem in the very next verse (Romans 3:24) which says, "...and are justified freely by His grace throught the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."

We are to fear God and keep his commandments because we will be judged. However, not one man has kept his commandments and therefore all are in need of redemption through the person of Jesus Christ.

StaticAge wrote:

Again, further proof you dont know what you talk about. You may like to pretend you know it all, but if you had done ANY research on the topic of anarchy (even something as simple as looking it up in a dictionary) you would know that a second meaning of anarchy is a utopian society. So, if I'm not listening to what you say, maybe its for the best.

Maybe you should try going to

I see it is futile to reason with you, as you refuse to accept anything you arent already comfortable believing. You can have the last word after this, I really dont care, if you want to be blind, be blind, its your life.

You claim I take scripture out of context... well then I must take out a great many, for I quoted a lot. I could quote more, but I am reminded of another verse, "dont throw pearls before swine".

I dont contend that the ransom isnt an important theme, but the central figure of the bible is Christ? So the Son is more important than the father then? Fact is, God doesnt owe man anything. Ask yourself who does the ransom and the life of Christ glorify? Man, Jesus, or God? So therefore, since it glorifies God- then what is its greater purpose do you think- to save mankind or to sanctify God's name and kingdom? Is it to man or Jesus the scriptures say to glorify? Throughout the entire bible, it is God who deserves glory. Jesus summed up the ENTIRE law of moses by saying that it was to love God with your whole heart, mind, strength, and soul, and secondly to love your neighbor (but only as you would yourself). I mean redemption is great, but to emphasize this as the focus of the bible ignores the fact that even if the ransom did NOT exist, God would still deserve the glory honor and worship. In fact, the ransom is merely paves the way so man can give glory to God, otherwise you miss not only the theme of the bible, but the purpose of the ransom: to sanctify God's name. So tell me- what is the purpose of the bible? To allow men to get to know God, or to simply tell them about salvation? Is the salvation the reason God deserves worship according to the bible? Man doesnt owe God worship because they were saved by him, they owe it because he is their judge, creator, lord, and god.

What you follow the scripture with at Ecclesiastes doesnt refute anything- I said the purpose of man was to fear God. Like I said, redemption is fine and great, but how does showing me that Jesus provides salvation erase my point? I never said he didnt, and I never said man was perfect either! In fact, in your eagerness to jump to different subject, you pass off the context of the entire book of Ecclesiastes- to seek what is the purpose of man, the purpose of life. It is summed up in those last verses, but because you only give consideration to what you already think you know, you miss the point it makes. The purpose of life isnt to be judged, but to love God and obey him because he is the supreme authority.

I have studied and read about anarchy for years, I already know what it means, but if you need evidence, the dictionary I use is Websters, although just about any dictionary worth its salt would say the same thing. I guess because you dont want to believe it, I must be making things up. Too bad for you and your delusions. Your definition may be partially true, but because you only give a surface analysis of the subject you still have no idea what you are talking about. Your argument is blinded by your ignorance.

I didnt say there wasnt ANY truth in government- again twisting what I said; what I said was that "truth" in the sense of something sacred, higher than men, is utterly lacking. I explained that to you before. My point is that while you prattle on about your belief in God etc, you simultaneously praise manmade governments who are at least partially responsible for evils done every day. My comment was that your argument was groundless, not because you introduced it, but because you argued against it, using no factual evidence to back what you were saying- what you were arguing.

And you are self righteous because the purpose of your bickering and arguments isnt to give God or the bible or Jesus glory- in fact your better than thou attitude gives a bad name to them all- you argue to prove yourself right. You argue out of pride, not love or kindness. this is the easiest point I can prove because you can say all you like, but your actions show you differently.

StaticAge wrote:

So the Son is more important than the father then?

Did I say that? No.

StaticAge wrote:

I mean redemption is great, but to emphasize this as the focus of the bible ignores the fact that even if the ransom did NOT exist, God would still deserve the glory honor and worship.

It does not ignore that fact. That fact is still true. However, the focus of the Bible is not on what would happen if the ransom did not exist, it is on what happens now that it does.

StaticAge wrote:

In fact, the ransom is merely paves the way so man can give glory to God, otherwise you miss not only the theme of the bible, but the purpose of the ransom: to sanctify God's name. So tell me- what is the purpose of the bible?

I realize that God is indeed getting the glory through the Bible and His redemptive plan. However, does this mean that the focus of the Bible is on the fact that God will recieve glory through it?

StaticAge wrote:

Is the salvation the reason God deserves worship according to the bible? Man doesnt owe God worship because they were saved by him, they owe it because he is their judge, creator, lord, and god.

Very true. God does deserve all the glory. And who can glorify God better than those who have been shown mercy? Was the Bible written to the angels, who glorify God constantly? Was it written to anything which exists in the heavens which all give glory to God? No. It was written to fallen man. Though God does deserve all the glory laud and honor, as you have stated, the central theme of the Bible does not have to be thus. It was written to man that they might glorify God. All those who accept Christ as their savior will be giving glory to God because they have been shown mercy.

StaticAge wrote:

The purpose of life isnt to be judged

Did I say it was?

StaticAge wrote:

I have studied and read about anarchy for years, I already know what it means, but if you need evidence, the dictionary I use is Websters, although just about any dictionary worth its salt would say the same thing. I guess because you dont want to believe it, I must be making things up. Too bad for you and your delusions. Your definition may be partially true, but because you only give a surface analysis of the subject you still have no idea what you are talking about. Your argument is blinded by your ignorance.

Again with the insults. Have I ever said that your definition doesn't exist? No. I never said that. It might very well be found in a different dictionary than I use. However, when I was talking about anarchy in the first place, I was talking about it as if it meant "absence of any form of political authority" or "a state of political confusion." If you would like, you can go back read my post and catch the point I was making by substituting the definitions I just gave for the word "anarchy."

StaticAge wrote:

My point is that while you prattle on about your belief in God etc, you simultaneously praise manmade governments who are at least partially responsible for evils done every day.

Umm... when have I praised manmade governments? The most amount of praise I gave them was that they were a "necessary evil."

StaticAge wrote:

And you are self righteous because the purpose of your bickering and arguments isnt to give God or the bible or Jesus glory- in fact your better than thou attitude gives a bad name to them all- you argue to prove yourself right.

You are right on one thing here. I have not been arguing in order to give God the glory. Maybe this is my problem. I have been arguing what I have found to be true. Truth exists. I am searching for it. If many people claim to have found the truth that God doesn't exist, or believe some other religion is true, I try to find out their reasoning. Only one of the beliefs can be correct. I am trying to figure out which I truly believe is.