God is not supernatural

Do you see how hard it is for me to be a TRUE Christian in the 21st century,

Jesus does change His mind in 2 Corinthians 5:1, and where He does NOT change His mind in Numbers 232:19?   Whew, its a tough faith to follow at times. :(

not when It comes to these scriptures I don't.   After all my initial beliefs about them,  I still stand by my over all opinion that - in the New Testament in particular-  these scriptures are telling another story of  a violent struggle for power among the many religious sects and factions.. I believe the story is there to be wheedled out from the many clues that betray the accepted story of man born of a virgin among straw and cows in a shed to became the messiah  of the Jews / saviour of Christendom . 

LOL!

So it does have an agenda? 

 I have been waiting for you to reveal even a tiny bit.

You have been very careful. LOL!

Well at least it explains somewhat the warped views you have.

And also why you NEVER reveal your true sources. I would be embarrassed too. 

The authority of Oxford as pertaining to the English language is unquestioned, surely.

It should be evident that God transcends nature. Therefore, there should be no controversy about God being considered "supernatural".

 have been watching The Witcher recently. Are the monsters Geralt kills on the show supernatural?

Like dragons and basilisks and ghouls and shit like that.

Yes Yahweh the God of the Bible is, supernatura;. He has to be, to be a Spirit.

Certainly in my mind they are probably fairytale stories.

Jesus existed before He appeared on Earth, and still does now.

not when It comes to these scriptures I don't.   After all my initial beliefs about them,  I still stand by my over all opinion that - in the New Testament in particular-  these scriptures are telling another story of  a violent struggle for power among the many religious sects and factions.. I believe the story is there to be wheedled out from the many clues that betray the accepted story of man born of a virgin among straw and cows in a shed to became the messiah  of the Jews / saviour of Christendom . 

LOL!

Which part of my reply did you find funny. You asked a fkn question, I answered. So be polite enough to explain what you found so humorous.

So it does have an agenda? 

 In what sense . And it was just a few post ago that you  were crying and accused me of "mocking you" and you call me "it".  And I believe that  you are confusing agenda with purpose.  You really do not know anything at all do ,"Lawyer,   Pastor ,   Chaplin"  REVEREND!!!?  #20<<<<<<<<<< Now that really IS something to "LOL"  about.

 I have been waiting for you to reveal even a tiny bit.

Then you should have simply asked  if  it was troubling you so much.  .  But that has been your problem all of your pitiful life hasn't it. You have never asked anything about anything at all. You have just been told and "passed it on" and without question. 

 I have made it clear on many of  my threads what I believe concerning these unreliable scriptures. I haven't  ever hidden the fact.

You have been very careful. LOL!

 Nope.  Again, what the fk are you laughing about? Are you unbalanced? why the hysterics?   I have always been open. I have said many times that I believe that there is another story below the surface of the ambiguous and unreliable biblical stories.  So  what and why you are wetting your nickers with laughter over it is beyond me. 

Well at least it explains somewhat the warped views you have.

 I have no warped views. If anyone here has warped views princess it is the cretinous that believe a man can walk on water and can  bring  to life  dead rotten stinking corpse's  that have been  buried 6ft under for days, weeks and hundreds of years!!!  Where as I simply believe that these so called "miracles" have other explainable meanings. 

 So you tell me princess, which one of those opinions and beliefs sounds more "warped".

  

And also why you NEVER reveal your true sources. I would be embarrassed too. 

 I have told you many times.  The source for my questions come DIRECTLY from  the scriptures themselves. I read them, and  I scrutinise them,  and they throw up questions time and time again,  You are just too fkn bone idle to do your own research of the bible itself never mind any extra biblical  materiel that may or may not support the claims made by these gospel writers in the scriptures.   

 Yet here you are , claiming to be  "qualified"  as A Lawyer and A  Pastor and A  Chaplin #20  to teach these scriptures to others, I think you called it "passing on" what you have been told. .   If ever I have said anything that requires me to supply a source then I do. As I did when you  reminded about my Son of God claim, which  not ONLY contained BIBLICAL sources but supporting evidence from people that are REALY "qualified" to confirm or deny one claim or another. 

 But I will tell you what REVEREND!?  The next time you believe a comment or claim of mine deserves a source, then please don't be afraid you point it out. 

 Just a reminder that  you have ignored or forgotten my request numerous times now . here>>>>> #10  Why?

 And this too seems to have slipped your memory  #54 but needs addressing a the earliest possible date. 

God is real and does real things. When someone is supernatural that means doing magic tricks. God did only real tricks because he is the one and only god.

The Orthodox Church itself rejects your conception of the church. Also, we reject the claim that the church is a denomination. This type of ecclessiology only serves to justify the existence of protestant sects that are detached from the church.

The ancient and venerable Saint Basil the great has this to say about your baptism...

"...they who were broken off had become laymen, and, because they are no longer able to confer on others that grace of the Holy Spirit from which they themselves are fallen away, they had no authority either to baptize or to ordain."

Now, it is the position of the church that under certain circumstances a bishop may make acceptable a baptism done by heretics, but this can only be done on entering the church and receiving chrismation. Apart from the church, there is no baptism.

A more recent Orthodox saint, Hilarion Troitsky writes, “Outside of her, whatever is called ‘Church’ is a congregation of heretics that have lost the one faith in the one Lord and consequently the baptism which is performed by them is not the Christian baptism.”

Even in the acts of the apostles we see that after Philip the deacon baptized the Samarians, it was still necessary for a bishop, priest, or in this case an apostle to come give the gift of The Holy Spirit.

"...when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women... Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost."

As St Basil up there said, those who are not with the church cannot be priests, they are laymen. Laymen cannot administer the sacrament of the seal of The Holy Spirit.

St Gregory the dialogist writes...

"And indeed we have learnt from the ancient institution of the Fathers that whosoever among heretics are baptized in the name of the Trinity, when they return to holy Church, may be recalled to the bosom of mother Church either by unction of chrism, or by imposition of hands, or by profession of the faith only. Hence the West reconciles Arians to the holy Catholic Church by imposition of hands, but the East by the unction of holy chrism."

St Leo the great writes...

"For it is the unity as such of ecclesiastical society that avails unto salvation, so that a man is not saved by Baptism to whom it was not given in that place where it is needful that it be given."

The point is, you may think you were baptised, and you may think you received The Holy Spirit, but the church has taught since the beginning that these things are not done independently of the church. The fathers of the church did not have the same understanding of ecclessiology that you do.

I don't know, every time you come in here calling Protestants heretics of the "true church" it kind of makes me like them more.

I mean, wow. "You were not really baptized." Was he not really saved, then?

I don't know, every time you come in here calling Protestants heretics of the "true church" it kind of makes me like them more.

I mean, wow. "You were not really baptized." Was he not really saved, then?

That just sounds like some authoritarian bullshit to me. The exact kind of authoritarian bullshit that caused the Protestant movement to begin with.