What Does It Mean To Fall From Grace ?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

I'm sure God did , thus we have Christ for that reason
So the fall was predestined, with Christ as the backup plan? But first, of course, God had to make a deal with the devil and sacrifice is his one and only son as a ransom for the Soul of Humanity. It all makes perfect sense now.
 
So the fall was predestined, with Christ as the backup plan? But first, of course, God had to make a deal with the devil and sacrifice is his one and only son as a ransom for the Soul of Humanity. It all makes perfect sense now.
It does if judgement exist remember God wears all hats he's the ultimate
 
Neo ------your quote ----But I still don't see any justice or love in letting so many of "His children" be born into such a sad state when "we" are born with so much opportunity. We are, after all, taking about one kick at the cat, so to speak, for an eternity free from the hell and torture for those post 13 year olds who grew up never "finding" or even looking for Jesus. What would they care in a world that gave them nothing. Must be one those paradoxes I guess.
God gave man complete control over this earth Neo ----it is the parents responsibility is to school the child on God -----no one has any excuse about not knowing God ----Man screwed up not God ----your blaming the wrong person Neo -----but even as you blame God His love is there for you --- you are the one rejecting Him ---He is always there for His Creation ---we have turn our backs on Him -----God has been taken out of our schools ---homes ---churches---businesses ----we humans took God out -----and the world is in a mess ----
So let me get this straight.. God gives man complete control over the earth. Man, however, makes huge mistakes on the way and the poor begin to suffer. Now since there is only "one chance" at redemption, and one chance only, then the eternal fate of the destitute and the war ravaged and the abused of this world, all sits on the shoulders of Man. So while we in the west enjoy our life, praising God and looking forward to a great eternity, the ones who never had a chance at "finding Jesus" will suffer for all of eternity because we messed things up... I'm sorry, I'm still not feeling the love and particularly the justice that God should've given to those who never had a chance.

Parents are indeed responsible for raising their children, but God, as the Father, should not let children look after children if they don't know what they are doing. Only the Law of Reincarnation and the Laws of Karma can answer this conundrum sufficiently, unless of course you ask Chansen, then the answer would be completely different. It's the "once chance at redemption" that doesn't hold water with me.
 
Well, the long weekend is over and I've enjoyed our conversation here. Since I usually don't go away on Aug 1st long weekends I've had a lot of time to post in the last few days. But alas, I have to return to work tomorrow, so I'd like to leave you with a song by Mr Robert Zimmerman himself. Don't know who did the cartoons but they go well with the song.

Cheers everyone, have a good week.

 
Hi Neo were in the world would you say , Christ Jesus has not been Preached?
If you are born into a Muslim or a Hindu or a Christian family then you are most likely going to be a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Christian.

If you are born into a poverty stricken country then you are most likely to go with what ever religion that would feed you.

We in the west feel so smug about saying that the missionaries have spread the word of Jesus to everyone, all around the world, (which they haven't), but the reality is that these missioanries are more than likely going to be met with suspicion, since they are preaching into a culture that is not theirs.

To make the claim that one "must accept Jesus" in order to be saved is an arrogant and an ignorant claim. Christ never said this. I know his words have been "interpreted" as if he said this, but that's just an interpretation, also known as doctrine.
 
If you are born into a Muslim or a Hindu or a Christian family then you are most likely going to be a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Christian.

If you are born into a poverty stricken country then you are most likely to go with what ever religion that would feed you.

We in the west feel so smug about saying that the missionaries have spread the word of Jesus to everyone, all around the world, (which they haven't), but the reality is that these missioanries are more than likely going to be met with suspicion, since they are preaching into a culture that is not theirs.

To make the claim that one "must accept Jesus" in order to be saved is an arrogant and an ignorant claim. Christ never said this. I know his words have been "interpreted" as if he said this, but that's just an interpretation, also known as doctrine.
--Neo first read John 3:16-21
Then try.--
Jhn 14:6Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.
 
How different airclean, would that sound to you if Jesus had said "I am a way, and a truth and a life; you can come to Abba Godde via my teachings"?

Given we've got no video evidence, and we have to assume that this is some sort of recreated memory, do you remember participles when you memorize stuff? I don't (my memory goes: way, truth, life, come to Abba Godde) and I have a really good memory - this morning I told my guy about a dream I had 53 years ago.
 
How different airclean, would that sound to you if Jesus had said "I am a way, and a truth and a life; you can come to Abba Godde via my teachings"?

Given we've got no video evidence, and we have to assume that this is some sort of recreated memory, do you remember participles when you memorize stuff? I don't (my memory goes: way, truth, life, come to Abba Godde) and I have a really good memory - this morning I told my guy about a dream I had 53 years ago.

That would be you changing scripture to fit your personal likes, also your memory theory does not fit firstly because the Jewish people were very very careful in preservation of there Holy Scriptures and secondly , all The 'I AM's" of Jesus support what He said that He is the Way


John 6: 35, 48 I am the bread of life
John 8: 12, 9:5 I am the light of the world
John 8: 58 Before Abraham was, I am
John 10:9 I am the door
John 10:11 I am the good shepherd
John 11:25 I am the resurrection and the life
John 14:6 I am the way, the truth, and the life John 15:1 I am the true vine

Jesus made it Perfectly Clear that He is not a way But the only way, then sealed it with His death and resurrection
 
Last edited:
Maybe that's perfectly clear to you, but that's not perfectly clear to me.

And Jesus' (purported) words are not the Jewish holy scriptures. Their canon was closed prior to Jesus' life. The New Testament was written, in Greek, by people who were not necessarily Jewish, in a period of some 30 to 75 years after Jesus' death. And Holy Scriptures are not written as a factual account, but as a theological statement. You can say that the early church government had some strong beliefs, but I don't think you've got any evidence as to Jesus' thoughts. No video camera, remember?

And again, what does the repetition of more verses with the same translation pattern mean? A true vine, a good shepherd. And John is the latest written of the gospels, and the most dedicated to developing a "Christology".
 
Maybe that's perfectly clear to you, but that's not perfectly clear to me.

of course not , you changed it .

And Jesus' (purported) words are not the Jewish holy scriptures. Their canon was closed prior to Jesus' life. The New Testament was written, in Greek, by people who were not necessarily Jewish, in a period of some 30 to 75 years after Jesus' death. And Holy Scriptures are not written as a factual account, but as a theological statement. You can say that the early church government had some strong beliefs, but I don't think you've got any evidence as to Jesus' thoughts. No video camera, remember?

no Im sorry your wrong , Jesus was Jews in every sense and meaning of the word , and so were the Apostles , Aramaic which was the main language used by Jews for both spoken and written communication, . Authors of the NT were people who used the lingua franca of the day i.e. Greek, rather than that used by religiously practicing Jews who wrote and communicated in Aramaic, Hebrew was still the language used in the temple - and in Rabbinic literature.

Example I speak Italian but in an English country I write the lingua franca of the day , English



And again, what does the repetition of more verses with the same translation pattern mean? A true vine, a good shepherd. And John is the latest written of the gospels, and the most dedicated to developing a "Christology".

again your changing the biblical words to fit your will

you are speculating
 
Of course I'm speculating. So are you. On the meaning of words written down in a language neither of us understands, all of which have been translated into English (never mind other languages) more than a hundred times, and used to justify everything from compulsory celibacy to murder. So yeah, we're speculating. You next. When you take notes at a chemistry lecture, you write,

"The temperature of the water was 50 degrees Celsus". Ya don't. You write "H20 temp 50"; you might add C if the notes were for someone else.
 
Of course I'm speculating. So are you.

actually no im not, Im standing on what it actually says , and there are eight I AM's that support my claim and zero to support yours

On the meaning of words written down in a language neither of us understands, all of which have been translated into English (never mind other languages) more than a hundred times, and used to justify everything from compulsory celibacy to murder. So yeah, we're speculating.

your wrong again, there is only ONE iteration that goes from the original Greek to the English, One, then from the English you have translations and transliterations.

Of the remaining differences, virtually all scholars agree that our current New Testament is 99.5% text pure and of the .5% ,none affects any significant doctrine, the eight " I AMs" is significant Doctrine also held up through tradition of Church.

This issue is not even contested by non-Christian scholars because if we reject the authenticity of the New Testament on textual grounds we'd have to reject every ancient work of antiquity and declare null and void every piece of historical information from written sources prior to the beginning of the second millennium A.D.



you have no bases
 
Last edited:
Neo --your quote -----So the fall was predestined, with Christ as the backup plan?

In all your getting get understanding Neo -----

No --No Neo Christ was always the plan from the beginning ----Christ was never the backup plan ------Christ was the 1st plan and is the last plan --Period
 
Neo --your quote -----So the fall was predestined, with Christ as the backup plan?

In all your getting get understanding Neo -----

No --No Neo Christ was always the plan from the beginning ----Christ was never the backup plan ------Christ was the 1st plan and is the last plan --Period

amen, Alpha & Omega
 
You can blame the Babylonian system for the poor Neo ---not God -----the banking system set up in Babylon is all about power and greed --it is set up to help the Rich Neo --and to make the general people poor ----- our present banking system keeps people poor ----

The is no profit in helping the poor ---there is more profit in help our animals ----it cost money to help the poor ---it profits businesses to help the abused animals of this world -----Why --cause you still have to take them to the Vet ----

What is wrong with this picture Neo ----man is responsible not God -----man ---greed and profit =power

images
images
images


https://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2016...he-right-to-starve-a-billion-people-to-death/
You Don’t Have The Right To Starve A Billion People To Death
 
actually no im not, Im standing on what it actually says , and there are eight I AM's that support my claim and zero to support yours



your wrong again, there is only ONE iteration that goes from the original Greek to the English, One, then from the English you have translations and transliterations.

Of the remaining differences, virtually all scholars agree that our current New Testament is 99.5% text pure and of the .5% ,none affects any significant doctrine, the eight " I AMs" is significant Doctrine also held up through tradition of Church.

This issue is not even contested by non-Christian scholars because if we reject the authenticity of the New Testament on textual grounds we'd have to reject every ancient work of antiquity and declare null and void every piece of historical information from written sources prior to the beginning of the second millennium A.D.



you have no bases

And you're still speculating. If you're absolutely honest with yourself, you'd admit that no-one KNOWS anything, except perhaps that which can be measured in our finite physical reality.
 
Back
Top