<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 10 proofs that John Key is the Anti-Christ</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html</link>
	<description>DPF&#039;s Kiwiblog - Fomenting Happy Mischief since 2003</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:27:45 +1300</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ross Nixon</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621506</link>
		<dc:creator>Ross Nixon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:52:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621506</guid>
		<description>Methinks tis a little early to be doing any serious speculation (as if we were) as to who the Antichrist will be.
For starters there is no one-world goverment yet - although Lord Monkton said yesterday that it is mentioned in the draft of the Copenhagen Agreement (now you know the reason behind the climate change hysteria, btw.)

Then again, I wonder if DPF could be the Antichrist?
After all, the Bible says that &quot;his look is more stout than his fellows&quot;. ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Methinks tis a little early to be doing any serious speculation (as if we were) as to who the Antichrist will be.<br />
For starters there is no one-world goverment yet &#8211; although Lord Monkton said yesterday that it is mentioned in the draft of the Copenhagen Agreement (now you know the reason behind the climate change hysteria, btw.)</p>
<p>Then again, I wonder if DPF could be the Antichrist?<br />
After all, the Bible says that &#8220;his look is more stout than his fellows&#8221;. <img src='http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Inventory2</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621464</link>
		<dc:creator>Inventory2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:30:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621464</guid>
		<description>John Key MUST be the anti-Christ - The Standard keeps telling us, so it MUST be so ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John Key MUST be the anti-Christ &#8211; The Standard keeps telling us, so it MUST be so <img src='http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MrTips</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621462</link>
		<dc:creator>MrTips</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:19:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621462</guid>
		<description>What a load of tosh. Everyone knows WhaleOil is the anti-Christ, or at the very least, New Zealand&#039;s real life Peter Griffin off Family Guy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a load of tosh. Everyone knows WhaleOil is the anti-Christ, or at the very least, New Zealand&#8217;s real life Peter Griffin off Family Guy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete George</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621461</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:12:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621461</guid>
		<description>It can be a serious subject, but you have to be able to laugh at it at times. Take for instance the subject of this topic. It appears to be serious - not sure if that makes it funny or sad. Arriving at a conclusion and then looking for anything that might support the argument. 

I have given religion serious consideration. And I don&#039;t feel damaged by my conclusions. I don&#039;t think I will change my conclusions unless I see evidence to the contrary, and considering no one has ever seen any verifiable evidence I don&#039;t expect that I will.

The key thing we have to be able to do is to respect the right for other people to arrive at their conclusions, whatever their beliefs or religion may be, as long as those beliefs aren&#039;t used to the detriment of others. I&#039;ll question people who make claims I disagree with, especially when they involve supposed superiority of their position - the &quot;if you don&#039;t believe what I believe then you&#039;re crap&quot; thing. We all eat and drink, and we all crap. 

Beliefs in NZ have fragmented and moderated, especially compared to many other countries.  We need to find a way to move forward together promoting reasonable morals without needing to belong to a particular club.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It can be a serious subject, but you have to be able to laugh at it at times. Take for instance the subject of this topic. It appears to be serious &#8211; not sure if that makes it funny or sad. Arriving at a conclusion and then looking for anything that might support the argument. </p>
<p>I have given religion serious consideration. And I don&#8217;t feel damaged by my conclusions. I don&#8217;t think I will change my conclusions unless I see evidence to the contrary, and considering no one has ever seen any verifiable evidence I don&#8217;t expect that I will.</p>
<p>The key thing we have to be able to do is to respect the right for other people to arrive at their conclusions, whatever their beliefs or religion may be, as long as those beliefs aren&#8217;t used to the detriment of others. I&#8217;ll question people who make claims I disagree with, especially when they involve supposed superiority of their position &#8211; the &#8220;if you don&#8217;t believe what I believe then you&#8217;re crap&#8221; thing. We all eat and drink, and we all crap. </p>
<p>Beliefs in NZ have fragmented and moderated, especially compared to many other countries.  We need to find a way to move forward together promoting reasonable morals without needing to belong to a particular club.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TimG_Oz</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621451</link>
		<dc:creator>TimG_Oz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:31:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621451</guid>
		<description>I thought there was something in the prophecy that said the AC couldn&#039;t have a silly accent?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought there was something in the prophecy that said the AC couldn&#8217;t have a silly accent?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Grant Michael McKenna</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621444</link>
		<dc:creator>Grant Michael McKenna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:20:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621444</guid>
		<description>God exists, but fortunately she *does* have a sense of humour, so we&#039;ll be ok.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>God exists, but fortunately she *does* have a sense of humour, so we&#8217;ll be ok.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: reid</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621436</link>
		<dc:creator>reid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:49:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621436</guid>
		<description>Pete, reality is, to believers: G-d exists. Period.

Humour aside, it&#039;s a serious subject and those that don&#039;t treat it with serious consideration damage themselves.

That doesn&#039;t mean you don&#039;t have a sense of humour.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pete, reality is, to believers: G-d exists. Period.</p>
<p>Humour aside, it&#8217;s a serious subject and those that don&#8217;t treat it with serious consideration damage themselves.</p>
<p>That doesn&#8217;t mean you don&#8217;t have a sense of humour.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete George</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621434</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:11:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621434</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Nearly there, one more push might do it.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Do you think I&#039;ve nearly converted Kris to reality?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Nearly there, one more push might do it.</p></blockquote>
<p>Do you think I&#8217;ve nearly converted Kris to reality?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: reid</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621425</link>
		<dc:creator>reid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:40:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621425</guid>
		<description>Anyhoo, and you make many valid points Kris, if the anti-Christ really did arise from New Zealand&#039;s &quot;eternal sea&quot; to dominate the world until defeated by St Michael as he will eventually be, how cool is that for us?

Air NZ would be VERY happy indeed and you do recall of course that JK is the Minster of Tourism.

How diabolical.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyhoo, and you make many valid points Kris, if the anti-Christ really did arise from New Zealand&#8217;s &#8220;eternal sea&#8221; to dominate the world until defeated by St Michael as he will eventually be, how cool is that for us?</p>
<p>Air NZ would be VERY happy indeed and you do recall of course that JK is the Minster of Tourism.</p>
<p>How diabolical.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kris K</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621424</link>
		<dc:creator>Kris K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:38:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621424</guid>
		<description>Pete George 8:12 pm,

&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;This is also why non Christians are described as ’spiritually dead’, and Christians as ’spiritually alive’.&quot;

Don’t you mean “this is why Christians describe non-Christians as spiritually dead”? It really just means that they have different beliefs. Offering a carrot to try to attract some followers.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

No, it&#039;s rather what God&#039;s word says versus any individual&#039;s personal opinion.
Having said that, the opportunity to have eternal life is a pretty good &#039;carrot&#039;.

&lt;blockquote&gt;It doesn’t really make sense to me. You say “yip I’m Christian” and voila, along comes a spirit for you. What if you then decide it’s bollocks, does your spirit float off to someone else? Or hang around waiting to go to hell?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I believe that genuine salvation, once received, cannot be &#039;lost&#039;. The Bible says as much.
Not to say that disobedient Christians won&#039;t be punished, or lose heavenly rewards previously earned for faithful service, etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pete George 8:12 pm,</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;This is also why non Christians are described as ’spiritually dead’, and Christians as ’spiritually alive’.&#8221;</p>
<p>Don’t you mean “this is why Christians describe non-Christians as spiritually dead”? It really just means that they have different beliefs. Offering a carrot to try to attract some followers.</p></blockquote>
<p>No, it&#8217;s rather what God&#8217;s word says versus any individual&#8217;s personal opinion.<br />
Having said that, the opportunity to have eternal life is a pretty good &#8216;carrot&#8217;.</p>
<blockquote><p>It doesn’t really make sense to me. You say “yip I’m Christian” and voila, along comes a spirit for you. What if you then decide it’s bollocks, does your spirit float off to someone else? Or hang around waiting to go to hell?</p></blockquote>
<p>I believe that genuine salvation, once received, cannot be &#8216;lost&#8217;. The Bible says as much.<br />
Not to say that disobedient Christians won&#8217;t be punished, or lose heavenly rewards previously earned for faithful service, etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MikeNZ</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621423</link>
		<dc:creator>MikeNZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:33:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621423</guid>
		<description>PaulL
I&#039;ve always wondered about that.

Kris K
You&#039;re doing a sterling job. 
You are part of my Judgment as much as I am part of yours.
The way I read it everyone goes to heaven, some just don&#039;t stay there.

Pete
Nearly there, one more push might do it.
Where&#039;s Andre and Ian when you want them ehh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PaulL<br />
I&#8217;ve always wondered about that.</p>
<p>Kris K<br />
You&#8217;re doing a sterling job.<br />
You are part of my Judgment as much as I am part of yours.<br />
The way I read it everyone goes to heaven, some just don&#8217;t stay there.</p>
<p>Pete<br />
Nearly there, one more push might do it.<br />
Where&#8217;s Andre and Ian when you want them ehh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kris K</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621421</link>
		<dc:creator>Kris K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:27:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621421</guid>
		<description>PaulL 7:54 pm,

&lt;blockquote&gt;I’m interested in the glorified body bit. What would one of these bodies be like? I’m guessing you’d need no reproductive organs, since there would be no reproduction in heaven. Which seems a bit of a downer. But then again, maybe I’m just thinking with my current body, which places value on these things. Perhaps being in the glory of god would make reproducing (or practicing for reproducing) pale in comparison?

Still, seems to me a design fault in these new bodies.

Which reminds me of a bad joke about three engineers:
A mechanical engineer ...&lt;/blockquote&gt;

As a mechanical engineer I always enjoy a good engineering joke.

You&#039;re correct regarding the glorified body being non reproductive sexually - apparently it is likened to angelic bodies which do not marry (reproduce) in heaven. They also do not require physical sustenance - so perhaps no internal organs whatsoever. Although we can choose to eat for enjoyment, so maybe there is. Christ ate after His resurrection afterall. My guess is in some ways it will resemble our earthly body, but in others it will be vastly different. It will not age or decay. It is interdimensional. It is not restricted by time, space or matter. We&#039;re talking about a serious upgrade here - both hardware and software.

Personally, I can&#039;t wait for the upgrade. This really is &#039;blow your mind&#039; territory!
Who would not choose it? And of course, who would not want the privilege of dwelling in the presence of the Creator God for all eternity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PaulL 7:54 pm,</p>
<blockquote><p>I’m interested in the glorified body bit. What would one of these bodies be like? I’m guessing you’d need no reproductive organs, since there would be no reproduction in heaven. Which seems a bit of a downer. But then again, maybe I’m just thinking with my current body, which places value on these things. Perhaps being in the glory of god would make reproducing (or practicing for reproducing) pale in comparison?</p>
<p>Still, seems to me a design fault in these new bodies.</p>
<p>Which reminds me of a bad joke about three engineers:<br />
A mechanical engineer &#8230;</p></blockquote>
<p>As a mechanical engineer I always enjoy a good engineering joke.</p>
<p>You&#8217;re correct regarding the glorified body being non reproductive sexually &#8211; apparently it is likened to angelic bodies which do not marry (reproduce) in heaven. They also do not require physical sustenance &#8211; so perhaps no internal organs whatsoever. Although we can choose to eat for enjoyment, so maybe there is. Christ ate after His resurrection afterall. My guess is in some ways it will resemble our earthly body, but in others it will be vastly different. It will not age or decay. It is interdimensional. It is not restricted by time, space or matter. We&#8217;re talking about a serious upgrade here &#8211; both hardware and software.</p>
<p>Personally, I can&#8217;t wait for the upgrade. This really is &#8216;blow your mind&#8217; territory!<br />
Who would not choose it? And of course, who would not want the privilege of dwelling in the presence of the Creator God for all eternity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete George</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621417</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:12:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621417</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;This is also why non Christians are described as ’spiritually dead’, and Christians as ’spiritually alive’. &lt;/blockquote&gt;

Don&#039;t you mean &quot;this is why Christians describe non-Christians as spiritually dead&quot;? It really just means that they have different beliefs. Offering a carrot to try to attract some followers.

It doesn&#039;t really make sense to me. You say &quot;yip I&#039;m Christian&quot; and voila, along comes a spirit for you. What if you then decide it&#039;s bollocks, does your spirit float off to someone else? Or hang around waiting to go to hell?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>This is also why non Christians are described as ’spiritually dead’, and Christians as ’spiritually alive’. </p></blockquote>
<p>Don&#8217;t you mean &#8220;this is why Christians describe non-Christians as spiritually dead&#8221;? It really just means that they have different beliefs. Offering a carrot to try to attract some followers.</p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t really make sense to me. You say &#8220;yip I&#8217;m Christian&#8221; and voila, along comes a spirit for you. What if you then decide it&#8217;s bollocks, does your spirit float off to someone else? Or hang around waiting to go to hell?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kris K</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621414</link>
		<dc:creator>Kris K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:09:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621414</guid>
		<description>Put it away 7:51 pm,

&lt;blockquote&gt;Kris K – your definition of being in heaven seems to be vary depending on which contradictory verse you’re trying to defend. Elijah clearly counts as being “in heaven” according to the bible “…And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven….” 2 Kings 2:1, 11-12, and you say he is there in “spirit and soul” only. Then you say Christian saints are in heaven, but that *doesn’t* count as being completely in heaven because they’re in “spirit and soul” form only…
Doesn’t it concern you that you can only make these arguments by constantly changing the definition of the words ?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Elijah (and Enoch of course) are perhaps the two special cases.
I dont have all the answers, but I think it has something to do with the fact that neither Elijah nor Enoch have died physically. So while they are perhaps in heaven now, there is no indication that they have received glorified bodies - which is required to dwell in Gods presence. So when the Bible refers to “no man is … in heaven” this could be an allusion to &#039;no glorified man in heaven&#039; - because, as I just said, this is required to dwell in God&#039;s presence. Now you really are going to accuse me of &#039;splitting hairs&#039;. I really don&#039;t know in these two exceptional cases - I will have to ask God when I see Him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Put it away 7:51 pm,</p>
<blockquote><p>Kris K – your definition of being in heaven seems to be vary depending on which contradictory verse you’re trying to defend. Elijah clearly counts as being “in heaven” according to the bible “…And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven….” 2 Kings 2:1, 11-12, and you say he is there in “spirit and soul” only. Then you say Christian saints are in heaven, but that *doesn’t* count as being completely in heaven because they’re in “spirit and soul” form only…<br />
Doesn’t it concern you that you can only make these arguments by constantly changing the definition of the words ?</p></blockquote>
<p>Elijah (and Enoch of course) are perhaps the two special cases.<br />
I dont have all the answers, but I think it has something to do with the fact that neither Elijah nor Enoch have died physically. So while they are perhaps in heaven now, there is no indication that they have received glorified bodies &#8211; which is required to dwell in Gods presence. So when the Bible refers to “no man is … in heaven” this could be an allusion to &#8216;no glorified man in heaven&#8217; &#8211; because, as I just said, this is required to dwell in God&#8217;s presence. Now you really are going to accuse me of &#8217;splitting hairs&#8217;. I really don&#8217;t know in these two exceptional cases &#8211; I will have to ask God when I see Him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PaulL</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621411</link>
		<dc:creator>PaulL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 06:54:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621411</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m interested in the glorified body bit.  What would one of these bodies be like?  I&#039;m guessing you&#039;d need no reproductive organs, since there would be no reproduction in heaven.  Which seems a bit of a downer.  But then again, maybe I&#039;m just thinking with my current body, which places value on these things.  Perhaps being in the glory of god would make reproducing (or practicing for reproducing) pale in comparison?

Still, seems to me a design fault in these new bodies.

Which reminds me of a bad joke about three engineers:
A mechanical engineer, an electrical engineer, and a civil engineer are sitting around talking about God. The mechanical engineer says, “God must have been a mechanical engineer, look at the way our muscles and bones move.” The electrical engineer disagrees, saying, “God must have been an electrical engineer, look at the electrical wiring in our brains.” After a moment the civil engineer says, “Well, he certainly wasn’t a civil engineer. What kind of idiot puts the playground right next to waste disposal?”</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m interested in the glorified body bit.  What would one of these bodies be like?  I&#8217;m guessing you&#8217;d need no reproductive organs, since there would be no reproduction in heaven.  Which seems a bit of a downer.  But then again, maybe I&#8217;m just thinking with my current body, which places value on these things.  Perhaps being in the glory of god would make reproducing (or practicing for reproducing) pale in comparison?</p>
<p>Still, seems to me a design fault in these new bodies.</p>
<p>Which reminds me of a bad joke about three engineers:<br />
A mechanical engineer, an electrical engineer, and a civil engineer are sitting around talking about God. The mechanical engineer says, “God must have been a mechanical engineer, look at the way our muscles and bones move.” The electrical engineer disagrees, saying, “God must have been an electrical engineer, look at the electrical wiring in our brains.” After a moment the civil engineer says, “Well, he certainly wasn’t a civil engineer. What kind of idiot puts the playground right next to waste disposal?”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Put it away</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621410</link>
		<dc:creator>Put it away</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 06:51:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621410</guid>
		<description>Kris K - your definition of being in heaven seems to be vary depending on which contradictory verse you&#039;re trying to defend.   Elijah clearly counts as being &quot;in heaven&quot; according to the bible &quot;...And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven....&quot; 2 Kings 2:1, 11-12, and you say he is there in &quot;spirit and soul&quot; only.  Then you say Christian saints are in heaven, but that *doesn&#039;t* count as being completely in heaven because they&#039;re in &quot;spirit and soul&quot; form only...
Doesn&#039;t it concern you that you can only make these arguments by constantly changing the definition of the words ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kris K &#8211; your definition of being in heaven seems to be vary depending on which contradictory verse you&#8217;re trying to defend.   Elijah clearly counts as being &#8220;in heaven&#8221; according to the bible &#8220;&#8230;And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven&#8230;.&#8221; 2 Kings 2:1, 11-12, and you say he is there in &#8220;spirit and soul&#8221; only.  Then you say Christian saints are in heaven, but that *doesn&#8217;t* count as being completely in heaven because they&#8217;re in &#8220;spirit and soul&#8221; form only&#8230;<br />
Doesn&#8217;t it concern you that you can only make these arguments by constantly changing the definition of the words ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kris K</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621409</link>
		<dc:creator>Kris K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 06:51:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621409</guid>
		<description>Pete George 7:29 pm,

&lt;blockquote&gt;Body – that’s the bag of bones bit.
Soul – the developed mind, thinking, feeling, loving, imagining.

Spirit – that which remains after death. Some think it is some sort of invisible floaty thing.
I think it is what you leave behind in memories and influences, especially in your children but also others you have touched.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I agree with your first two definitions, Pete.

Human spirit:
From a Biblical perspective the human spirit is where the Holy Spirit resides after someone receives Christ.
Prior to this it is described as &#039;dead&#039;, or perhaps empty. Without God&#039;s Spirit it is empty/dead.
This is also why non Christians are described as &#039;spiritually dead&#039;, and Christians as &#039;spiritually alive&#039;. Similarly, when someone becomes a Christian, as a result of becoming spiritually alive they also receive &#039;eternal life&#039;. It is, therefore, through Christ alone we can have eternal life.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pete George 7:29 pm,</p>
<blockquote><p>Body – that’s the bag of bones bit.<br />
Soul – the developed mind, thinking, feeling, loving, imagining.</p>
<p>Spirit – that which remains after death. Some think it is some sort of invisible floaty thing.<br />
I think it is what you leave behind in memories and influences, especially in your children but also others you have touched.</p></blockquote>
<p>I agree with your first two definitions, Pete.</p>
<p>Human spirit:<br />
From a Biblical perspective the human spirit is where the Holy Spirit resides after someone receives Christ.<br />
Prior to this it is described as &#8216;dead&#8217;, or perhaps empty. Without God&#8217;s Spirit it is empty/dead.<br />
This is also why non Christians are described as &#8217;spiritually dead&#8217;, and Christians as &#8217;spiritually alive&#8217;. Similarly, when someone becomes a Christian, as a result of becoming spiritually alive they also receive &#8216;eternal life&#8217;. It is, therefore, through Christ alone we can have eternal life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: side show bob</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621407</link>
		<dc:creator>side show bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 06:37:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621407</guid>
		<description>Maybe he is talking about the worm in tequila, that tastes like hell.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe he is talking about the worm in tequila, that tastes like hell.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete George</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621406</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 06:31:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621406</guid>
		<description>BTW, labelling someone the antichrist is heavy stuff, worse than labelling someone as the next Hitler or Stalin. Unthinking, uncaring.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BTW, labelling someone the antichrist is heavy stuff, worse than labelling someone as the next Hitler or Stalin. Unthinking, uncaring.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete George</title>
		<link>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2009/10/10_proofs_that_john_key_is_the_anti-christ.html#comment-621405</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 06:29:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/?p=37513#comment-621405</guid>
		<description>Body - that&#039;s the bag of bones bit

Soul - the developed mind, thinking, feeling, loving, imagining

Spirit - that which remains after death. Some think it is some sort of invisible floaty thing.
I think it is what you leave behind in memories and influences, especially in your children but also others you have touched</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Body &#8211; that&#8217;s the bag of bones bit</p>
<p>Soul &#8211; the developed mind, thinking, feeling, loving, imagining</p>
<p>Spirit &#8211; that which remains after death. Some think it is some sort of invisible floaty thing.<br />
I think it is what you leave behind in memories and influences, especially in your children but also others you have touched</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
