- Topic
meaning of life Eternal life
The John 5: 21-24 "For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him. I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned;he has crossed over from death to life.
Hebrews 13:8
New International Version (NIV)
8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment.Matthew 22:37-38
WMSCOG members wonder how can Jesus, male, give eternal life when all life on earth is given through the mother, female?
I see we are still on this mother business. Lol….
YoMomma SoFat wrote:
WMSCOG members wonder how can Jesus, male, give eternal life when all life on earth is given through the mother, female?
What do they say about creatures like seahorses (fathers birth the babies) and snails (one snail can produce offspring by itself)?
genny wrote:
YoMomma SoFat wrote:
WMSCOG members wonder how can Jesus, male, give eternal life when all life on earth is given through the mother, female?
What do they say about creatures like seahorses (fathers birth the babies) and snails (one snail can produce offspring by itself)?
They've heard that before and there's a comeback to it. What they would say is that the seahorses are proof that God could have created man to give birth but he didn't, at the end, it was man that he made in his image not seahorses.
Also, in my opinion I think the seahorse example is not that good because technically the male seahorse just puts the already fertilized eggs in his puch… but that's another subject.
The thing with the WMS is that they use the "you can see that God has male and female through the nature" when it's convenient for them. A conversation would go like this:
- WMS Member: You can see God's divine nature and invisible qualities through the creation. Always, when there's a Father, there's a Mother.
- Non Member with brains: Well… not always. There are a lot of animals that reproduce asexually.
- WMS Member: Yes… but majority have Father and Mother.
- Non Member with brains: Well… if you consider bacteria, virus, microbes and plants, they are living beings and were created by God… I don't know if you can say that majority have Father and Mother.
- WMS Member: Yes, I understand, but what does the Bible say? God made "man" in his image… "male and female", so the image of God is male and female, we just have to focus on man.
- Non member with brains: Yeah, I understand that, but you were the one that said that most animals have Father and Mother.
- WMS Member: Let's turn to Galatians 4…. (subject changed!)
WMS members just repeat things that they were told by other people, who are just repeating what they were told! If somebody challenges their teachings is very easy to prove they are wrong. That's the reason why they are discouraged from talking with people who can challenge them. If you are preaching and somebody challenges you and you take a lot of time, you are later told that satan put that person on the way to stop you from preaching to the "true children" because the "true children" would go to "zion" without arguing a lot… they would just love what they call "the word of God"
YoMomma SoFat wrote:
WMSCOG members wonder how can Jesus, male, give eternal life when all life on earth is given through the mother, female?
If it's impossible for males to give life then I wonder where Eve came from. Because her creation alone proves that it's not impossible for males to give life.
Really this mama god thing makes zero sense. nada, nil, zip.
Adam didn’t give eve life
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that he shall come again in the east and provide followers with a secret path through the Bible, and then whomsoever believeth in God the Mother shall not perish but have everlasting life.
FIXED.
Simon-
Again, a rebuttal with no acceptable explanation.
Azula-
The bible (the NIV) isn't as explicit with the creation of Eve as it is with the creation of Adam. Gen 2:21-22 just says God created Eve from the rib of Adam. It doesn't say breath (according to common interpretation, life) was blown on the rib or anything like that. She was just created from Adam. My guess is that some of the breath which was already within Adam was transfered into Eve. Therefore, God didn't "need" to blow breath (according to common interpretation, life) into Eve because there was breath already in the rib. I don't know.. I'm just trying to make sense of Eve's creation independent of the WMSCOG interpretation.
21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs[g] and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
Genny-
There lies a double-standard. As a member, I brought up the fact that in nature one can see God's divine self. I purposely chose animals and plants that would help describe the mother/father relationship. If I came across someone who was aware of the many species of animals that don't follow the mother/father "rule", I would explain that God the Father and God the Mother are one God. That is expressed in the animals and plants that don't need 2 separate parents because they're meshed into one, like God. Sometimes there are 2 Gods, the Father and Mother, and sometimes there is one God who plays the role of Father and Mother. Which ever pleased the situation. No one, not one person caught my mistake. Not even me…. until much later that is.
Simon wrote:
Adam didn't give eve life
True
Gen 2:7 "the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."
So here we can see that God Jehovah gave life if then there's a need for mamma g then why is it not mentioned because it was the Father who gave the breath of life.
Questioninginla wrote:
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that he shall come again in the east and provide followers with a secret path through the Bible, and then whomsoever believeth in God the Mother shall not perish but have everlasting life.
FIXED.
hahaha, Q, I love it when you do that!
Azula wrote:
True
Gen 2:7 "the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."
So here we can see that God Jehovah gave life if then there's a need for mamma g then why is it not mentioned because it was the Father who gave the breath of life.
According to an online interlinear bible, the Hebrew word for LORD in this verse is Yahweh, which, according to popular belief including the WMSCOG, is God the Father. I'm telling the whole this right now.
Renita I’m not here to please your false standards of reason and logic and discussion
Indeed Azula except. . Sometimes father is really mother and sometimes he is really she cuz its the “last secret” as is Passover Ahnsahnghong sabbath the seven feasts etc
How many people exited because they were able to think clearly about a logical argument?
*waits for the maybe 1 person on the entire planet to raise his/her hand*
Simon-
False standards? Part of discussing/debating, in America at least, is saying more than "you're wrong". It's not my standard. I see you lived up to my "false standards" when responding to Azula, however.
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence
Debaters stick to that how much more Shallow you’re wrong does it get
Further I didn’t just say you’re wrong there was just nowhere further to go
Simon wrote:
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence
Debaters stick to that how much more Shallow you're wrong does it get
-And you're one of them. You know your agruments have been debunked yet you still insist on your beliefs.
Further I didn't just say you're wrong there was just nowhere further to go
ChurchDestroyer101 wrote:
Simon wrote:
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence
Debaters stick to that how much more Shallow you're wrong does it get
-And you're one of them. You know your agruments have been debunked yet you still insist on your beliefs.
Further I didn't just say you're wrong there was just nowhere further to go
He acts as the beholder of all knowledge. He knows more, he's more correct, he holds the truth as is taught in Zion. He might (and I use might loosely) not worship Ash and Zahng anymore but he's still mentally a member of the WMSCOG.
Even when I asked "What do you have to contribute to the OP? What do you know about the Jubilee? etc. etc." he answered, in his own words, the OP isn't about the WMSCOG. How does that contribute to the discussion about the year of Jubilee? He insists on correcting people instead of helping us help those who are still worshipping a business woman. Why does he come to this site? If not to flex I have no idea..
I like that worshipping a business woman. lol
Liar
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.