Religion & Spirituality - 6 August 2007

usually when you're looking for a spouse and you pray and ask the lord for the right qualities in that special someone, how do you know it came from the lord and not the devil, cause the devil can imitate god's work, thinking that the lord has finally answered our prayers!

2007-08-06 07:15:16 · 13 answers · asked by mexcisha 3

40 children, 40 days, no adults—eager to prove they can build a better world for tomorrow in the new reality series KID NATION. Settling in Bonanza City, New Mexico, once a thriving mining town but now deserted, these kids, ages 8 to 15 and from all walks of life, will build their own new world, pioneer-style. They will confront grown-up issues while coping with the classic childhood emotions of homesickness, peer pressure and the urge to break every rule. Episodes end with a town meeting in which the kids award one child a gold star worth $20,000, all leading to the grand finale, with an unimaginable test, the biggest awards and a special surprise for every child.

http://www.cbs.com/primetime/kid_nation/

I posted here, because the promo's on TV show them fighting about religion.

2007-08-06 07:12:48 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-06 07:12:39 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-06 07:12:30 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-06 07:10:02 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

Ignoring for the fact that my question implies that humans are animals and thus ethically equivalent to other animals, I'm going to claim that it's because God created man to be ethical.

It's not like human ethics are the result of a highly evolved intellectual capacity that allows us to reason about complex issues.

It's also not true that animals like dolphins have been observed to behave in ways we would consider ethical. For example, it's not like this link contains evidence that dolphins behave altruistically.
http://www.bio.davidson.edu/people/vecase/behavior/Spring2001/Spring01/Ewart/Altruism.html

2007-08-06 07:09:40 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

I don't understand how He died for our sins now. This seems too easy of an excuse for people that have sinful lives now.
Romans...and others i can understand....they wanted Him dead.
Judas...betrayed Him...so yes.
The Disciples...fail to recognized Him, when the Romans asked if they knew Him..so i can understand how they sinned.
but for us...2000 years later...He died because some rape, kills, or etc...now? Please help me understand this.
I do understand that He was very loving.
But when He said 'I forgive You'...couldn't He have meant that He was forgiving the disciples, Judas..Romans..etc...and then the Disciples..changed it into..'Forgiving all of mankind for their Sins?''...or it just got distorted in interpretation?....When the disciples were telling people that He died for our sins...they actually meant..that Jesus died because of the sins of the Disciples...could this be so...?

2007-08-06 07:07:57 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-06 07:07:56 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

Would you really be ready to leave your old life and follow His Path?

2007-08-06 07:07:05 · 30 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-06 07:05:36 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-06 07:05:35 · 20 answers · asked by 6th Finger 2

what directed you to your current belief?

2007-08-06 07:05:29 · 15 answers · asked by Myaloo 5

so many christians on this forum have used the fact that there is hard evidence of jesus as a way to substantiate their religion. how does the proof of the existence of a man validate their beliefs, because evidence of jesus does not mean evidence of god!

2007-08-06 07:04:02 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-06 07:02:23 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-06 06:59:46 · 11 answers · asked by Atheist Eye Candy 8 2

Just curious what an atheist believes a heartache is when a loved one dies, or when a divorce happens, or when a child dies. If we are just animals why do we have heartaches, love, feelings, emotions? So is a heartache a chemical process felt in the heart due to a separation of something that they knew for a while?

2007-08-06 06:57:45 · 22 answers · asked by mchana79 2

Have the ancient schools of real teaching been lost forever?

2007-08-06 06:57:41 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

Deut.13: 1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

A prophet of God must be in agreement with the words of the prophets and the known word of God.

1John 2: 22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: [but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
24 Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.

1John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
4 Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.
5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.
6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.
7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.
12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

Anyone who claims to be a prophet of God must agree Jesus is the Christ the Son of God who is our savior.

2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist

Gal. 1: 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

If an angel or a man preach a different gospel he is not of God.

2007-08-06 06:56:19 · 6 answers · asked by djmantx 7

Why is it when someone says that eternal question: "does or doesn't God exist?", someone on the opposite part has to interject and get all defensive about their views and make them seem like they are right and the other person is down right wrong? Also why is is that in church (also outside of church) and with the bible (also many people) they tell us that we should believe in god so there can be eternal peace in the afterlife, that you will see the benifits if you drop to your knees and beg for gods forgiveness, that kind words and actions will get you in heaven, that god truly exists, believe in gods words, but if someone was to say why they did something and their answer is "Because God told me to do so", why are they slapped with the lable of being insane? People talk to God in the Bible and people believe them (only proof of exsistance is in the bible), so in modern times if someone was to say that they talked to God is it any different than someone talking to God in the Bible?

2007-08-06 06:54:50 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

If Satan tempts us into sinning, who tempted Satan that first time?

2007-08-06 06:51:36 · 20 answers · asked by Samurai Jack 6

Do you believe we (the U.S.) dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima and/or Nagasaki? The reasoning is this: If carbon dating can't be trusted then our fundamental understanding of how the atomic structure works and the foundations for all modern chemistry for that matter are wrong. If various radiometric dating techniques don't work, or work improperly, it's because we just don't get it, so to speek, that we don't understand atoms. If radiometric dating doesn't work, there is no way we could have had the understanding to split an atom, which is based on the same processes and understandings. So, given that, do you doubt that we "nuked" Hiroshima and/or Nagasaki? Or that we can get power from a nuclear power plant? If radiocarbon dating is wrong, both those things would be impossible. What does this do, if anything, to your doubts/arguments for a young earth or against the evolutionary timeline?

2007-08-06 06:49:38 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-08-06 06:46:03 · 9 answers · asked by Coloradogrl 1

my religion is called The Church of Wilford Brimley's Mustache. we are polytheistic, but our principle diety is Wilford Brimley's mustache. diabetes is our rough equivalent of satan, and our holy sacrament is oat meal.

2007-08-06 06:42:04 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

Dear pentecostal brothers,
I hope you don't feel offended or annoyed about this. This is what I found out:
Tongues are not mentioned in any of the post-apostolic early church fathers' writings. Clemente of Rome, Justine Martyr, Origenes, Crisostomus and others( I hope you are informed about the early post-apostolic church leader) - considered tongues as a remote practice, something that occured in the apostolic times.
After the first century of christhianity, the only people that supposedly spoke in tongues were Montanus and his followers in the Second century and his main disciple: Tertullian. This group was heretic and was discredited because of the prophecies that fail to fulfill, specially the prophecy that the New Jerusalem would descend to Minor Asia during Montanus' days.
The next group that claimed to speak in tongues were the Cevenoles in the Seventeenth Century. This was also discredited due to their unfulfilled prophecies and military activities.
About 1731, a group of Roman-Catholic reformers named "Jansenists" celebrated night meetings at the tomb of their leader, where supposedly occured extatic tongues.
Another group that "spoke in tongues" were the Shakers, disciples of Mother Ann Lee, who lived from 1736 to 1784. She considered herself as the female equivalent of Jesuschrist. Then she founded the Shaker Community in Troy, New York. This group practiced very inmoral acts.
In 1830, Edward Irving started in London a small group named "Irvinguites". It is said he had revelations that CONTRADICTED THE SCRIPTURES. His prophecies remained unfulfilled and his alleged healings were followed by death. They also "spoke in tongues".
Joseph Smith- the leader of the Mormons and his followers "spoke in tongues" as well.
From Montanus up to Joseph Smith, every time that "tongues speaking" took place, they were never considered as part of genuine or orthodox christhianity.
But in the late nineteenth century, there was a group in the U.S.A named "Holliness Movement". Tongues speaking and other extatic phenomena were common.
It was in 1901, in the Bethel Bible College in Topeka Kansas that the tongues activities gave birth to the Pentecostal Movement.
Charles Parham, many times called "the father of modern pentecostalism", asked his students a question "What is the biblical evidence of the Holy Spirit baptism"? Then later his student, Agnes Ozman "received the Holy Spirit Baptism".
What is your opinion about this historical information? Were you previously informed about this? And a question:
You have two options, one is that tongues ceased after the death of all the apostles. But that tongues reappeared in the late nineteenth century or the early twentieth century. Or the other is that tongues never really ceased.
And a final great question: Were christhians wrong for about 1700-1800 years concerning the tongues issue?

2007-08-06 06:41:18 · 20 answers · asked by noname 1

Spare me the men did it babble,i know the story of it.
What i am asking is who do you think inspired men to create the atomic bom?
God or the devil?

2007-08-06 06:41:03 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

Why use "Maybe" "may have"....seems they are not 100% sure of anything...
And everything they discover is "35 billion years ago" "100 million years ago"...why can't they discover anything recent years....seems those millions of years is a way backup other lousy "Theories".....

And those who put their souls on the line, in believing such uncertainity, are surely deceived...

2007-08-06 06:41:03 · 32 answers · asked by MrPlankton 2

Since He founded only One Church, as Scripture clearly shows in Matthew 16:18, and since He guaranteed the Perpetuality of that Church in the same verse and in so many other verses, then please tell me the name of the Church which He did found? After all, it must still be here and it must have a name, isn't that true?"

2007-08-06 06:40:37 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous

I am. I am reading the bible and cleaning the house AND getting on Y! at the same time. Oh yeah! Multi task.
More coffee! Want some?

2007-08-06 06:38:50 · 11 answers · asked by Myaloo 5

I can be moved by other influences. How realistic are they ?Very.
When someone says,"How unrealistic!",the words that come forth only only apply to the rules of THEIR reality.
Because they have not created a reality firm enough to melt they have EVERYTHING to lose should they accept another concept imposed by a free reality. Ridiculous? For you.
The things that bother you-banish them from the realms of your mind...and they will disappear until your reality absorbs it once again.

2007-08-06 06:37:01 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

Could it be a corrupt culture? Corrupt leaders? A combination of the two? I know many very religious and strict Muslims, and not a single one of them backs up a single terrorist. They believe in forgiveness and leaving things that they have no control over up to God. They also know that suicide and killing people who are innocent (innocence means have done absolutely nothing wrong worthy of death such as killing another, which would be the only reason) are wrong and send you straight to hell. What is your opinion on this?

"The first thing the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) did after settling in the city of Madinah, to which he had been invited as leader, was to conclude a treaty between the Muslims and the followers of the Book (Jews and Christians) of that city. According to this treaty, the Muslims guaranteed them freedom of belief and granted them the same rights and duties as those enjoyed by the Muslims."

2007-08-06 06:35:59 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous