[color="#0000ff"]Meaning of one can approach Father through Me only
When you are worshipping the statue or photo of the past human incarnation, your photo or statue also indicates the eternal Lord existed in that human body. The Lord being eternal exists even today. Therefore, your photo indicates the Lord existing today. The statue or photo only indicates the existence of the Lord in a human form. It does not mean that the Lord existed only in that human body and is not present in any human body later on. If the Lord can exist in one human body, what is the objection for the Lord to exist in another human body also? Once the concept of the existence of the Lord in human body is accepted, you must not have any objection to accept the Lord in another human body also. When you say that the current flows in this wire, you should not object the possibility of the flow of same current in another similar wire. If you object, you are a blind, rigid, ignorant lay- man and you can never be called as a scientist. Such conservative people will never change and even the liquid fire in the hell cannot change them. When Jesus told that one could approach the God through Him only it means that one can approach the unimaginable God through the medium of human form only and does not mean that one can approach the unimaginable God through that particular human body called as Jesus only.
RE: Meaning of one can approach Father through Me only
Dear Dattswami
If you object, you are a blind, rigid, ignorant lay- man and you can never be called as a scientist.
With respect, I consider this quite a rude thing to write and having a scientific background myself, I personally find this objectionable. Everyone has their own opinion but youreally ought tobe respectful about those of others, even ifyou do not agree with them, andplease don'tbe insulting.
I do commend you for having your own beliefs but your postings seem to be merely preachings and are not phrased in a way that invite discussion which is the whole point of the forum. Brevity would also be appreciated.
Best wishes
Moonfairy
RE: Meaning of one can approach Father through Me only
Dear moonfairy,
I commend you on being the only person that understands - so far - what Anil is talking about :D. I couldn't take offense as I do not know what he is trying to say [sm=scratchchin.gif][sm=scratchchin.gif]. Are you angry Dattaswami? As,unfortunately when you do 'anger' you are feeding off the energy of the antichrist [sm=jump3.gif], and become disconnected with the Christ energy. All fundementalists and terrorists live in the energy of the antichrist and yet claim to be devotees of God [sm=scratchchin.gif]
Interesting thread possibliities though [sm=soapbox.gif]
have a lovely day all
Publisher
RE: Meaning of one can approach Father through Me only
ORIGINAL: moonfairy
Dear Dattswami
If you object, you are a blind, rigid, ignorant lay- man and you can never be called as a scientist.
With respect, I consider this quite a rude thing to write and having a scientific background myself, I personally find this objectionable. Everyone has their own opinion but youreally ought tobe respectful about those of others, even ifyou do not agree with them, andplease don'tbe insulting.
I do commend you for having your own beliefs but your postings seem to be merely preachings and are not phrased in a way that invite discussion which is the whole point of the forum. Brevity would also be appreciated.
Best wishes
Moonfairy
Moonfairy;
When a scientific atheist denies the existence of God, he is denying his own premise of validation of a phenomenon by direct perception. The human incarnation of the Lord comes in this world and performs inexplicable miracles. These miracles are perceived by us. How can they deny the perception of such miracles? Agreed, that the same miracle may be conducted by an alternative means. This alternative means of performing the same effect may be explicable by science. However that still does not deny the first means which achieved the given effect in an inexplicable way. For example, a brilliant student may score cent percent points in an examination. Another student may score cent percent points on the examination by cheating. Such a false cent percent score cannot deny the genuine score. The result may be the same, but the processes are different. There is a clear-cut difference in the two students.
One is brilliant student while the other is a cheater. A human incarnation of the Lord may perform a miracle such as producing vibh?ti or sacred ash spontaneously in His hands. A trickster may also achieve the same result by sleight of hand. He may have previously hidden some ash in a secret pocket in his sleeve or within the grooves of his fingers. The trick of the magician is explicable when discovered but miracle of the Lord is not. Although the effect is the same in both cases since the miracle of the Lord can be duplicated by a skilled magician, the two processes are not the same. Just because the result is the same, processes need not be same.
The same result need not have the same process. If it were, it would deny the fundamentals of science. In nature, we observe that there are several alternative routes to achieving the same effect or result. A chemical compound can be produced in several ways (Hess's Law). Since the final compound obtained is same, does not mean that the chemical reactions and the intermediates in each path are also the same. The same Chennai city can be reached by several ways. The fact that the final destination is the same does not mean that different routes to reach the city do not exist. There are separate routes and one may be better than the other.
RE: Meaning of one can approach Father through Me only
Dear Dattswami
When a scientific atheist denies the existence of God, he is denying his own premise of validation of a phenomenon by direct perception. The human incarnation of the Lord comes in this world and performs inexplicable miracles
You seem to be implying all scientists are atheists but I am sure this is NOT the case. Only SOME are. You cannot expect persons of a scientific background to suddenly believe what you are preaching because unless there is some evidence for this to be so. It really is, as you keep on saying 'unimagineable'. And 'No' I am not expecting that 'He' comes along and performs miracles just so that 'He' may be believed.
I notice you did notrespond to my quote:-
With respect, I consider this quite a rude thing to write and having a scientific background myself, I personally find this objectionable. Everyone has their own opinion but youreally ought tobe respectful about those of others, even ifyou do not agree with them, andplease don'tbe insulting.
[&:][&:]
Best wishes
Moonfairy