Opinions on Jesus Christ
So instead of regarding the informatino presented you merely bruch it off and say I'm not changing my mind so I'm not going to continue in this discussion regardless of the information presented.
2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not listen to the sound doctrine, but, having itching ears, will heap up for themselves teachers after their own lusts;
2Ti 4:4 and will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside to fables.
Paul's defense to the court of Festus
Act 26:22 Having therefore obtained the help that is from God, I stand to this day testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would happen,
Act 26:23 how the Christ must suffer, and how, by the resurrection of the dead, he would be first to proclaim light both to these people and to the Gentiles."
Act 26:24 As he thus made his defense, Festus said with a loud voice, "Paul, you are crazy! Your great learning is driving you insane!"
Act 26:25 But he said, "I am not crazy, most excellent Festus, but boldly declare words of truth and reasonableness.
Act 26:26 For the king knows of these things, to whom also I speak freely. For I am persuaded that none of these things is hidden from him, for this has not been done in a corner.
Act 26:27 King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe."
Act 26:28 Agrippa said to Paul, "With a little persuasion are you trying to make me a Christian?"
Act 26:29 Paul said, "I pray to God, that whether with little or with much, not only you, but also all that hear me this day, might become such as I am, except for these bonds."
Act 26:30 The king rose up with the governor, and Bernice, and those who sat with them.
Act 26:31 When they had withdrawn, they spoke one to another, saying, "This man does nothing worthy of death or of bonds."
Act 26:32 Agrippa said to Festus, "This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar."
Prophetic word of our current day and the manner in which we live as well as to the religious leaders of this current day having turned from sound doctrine to foolishness, be ye not deceived by false prophets.
Rom 1:17 For in it is revealed God's righteousness from faith to faith. As it is written, "But the righteous shall live by faith."
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
Rom 1:19 because that which is known of God is revealed in them, for God revealed it to them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse.
Rom 1:21 Because, knowing God, they didn't glorify him as God, neither gave thanks, but became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and traded the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed animals, and creeping things.
Rom 1:24 Therefore God also gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves,
Rom 1:25 who exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this reason, God gave them up to vile passions. For their women changed the natural function into that which is against nature.
Rom 1:27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural function of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another, men doing what is inappropriate with men, and receiving in themselves the due penalty of their error.
Rom 1:28 Even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil habits, secret slanderers,
Rom 1:30 backbiters, hateful to God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, unforgiving, unmerciful;
Rom 1:32 who, knowing the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also approve of those who practice them.
Racin77db:
As far as Jesus being married there is no basis of this in or outside of Scripture. Peter is known to have been married and is written of in the Word, as marriage is a glorious event and Life in God's sight and that this is the primary image of Christ and His Love for His Bride. His Bride is the body of Christ, and this is the absolute reason that He would have never been married as it was not part of the Father's plan as His Bride still awaits the Bridegroom's return.
2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not listen to the sound doctrine, but, having itching ears, will heap up for themselves teachers after their own lusts;
2Ti 4:4 and will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside to fables.
Paul's defense to the court of Festus
Act 26:22 Having therefore obtained the help that is from God, I stand to this day testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would happen,
Act 26:23 how the Christ must suffer, and how, by the resurrection of the dead, he would be first to proclaim light both to these people and to the Gentiles."
Act 26:24 As he thus made his defense, Festus said with a loud voice, "Paul, you are crazy! Your great learning is driving you insane!"
Act 26:25 But he said, "I am not crazy, most excellent Festus, but boldly declare words of truth and reasonableness.
Act 26:26 For the king knows of these things, to whom also I speak freely. For I am persuaded that none of these things is hidden from him, for this has not been done in a corner.
Act 26:27 King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe."
Act 26:28 Agrippa said to Paul, "With a little persuasion are you trying to make me a Christian?"
Act 26:29 Paul said, "I pray to God, that whether with little or with much, not only you, but also all that hear me this day, might become such as I am, except for these bonds."
Act 26:30 The king rose up with the governor, and Bernice, and those who sat with them.
Act 26:31 When they had withdrawn, they spoke one to another, saying, "This man does nothing worthy of death or of bonds."
Act 26:32 Agrippa said to Festus, "This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar."
Prophetic word of our current day and the manner in which we live as well as to the religious leaders of this current day having turned from sound doctrine to foolishness, be ye not deceived by false prophets.
Rom 1:17 For in it is revealed God's righteousness from faith to faith. As it is written, "But the righteous shall live by faith."
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
Rom 1:19 because that which is known of God is revealed in them, for God revealed it to them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse.
Rom 1:21 Because, knowing God, they didn't glorify him as God, neither gave thanks, but became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and traded the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed animals, and creeping things.
Rom 1:24 Therefore God also gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves,
Rom 1:25 who exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this reason, God gave them up to vile passions. For their women changed the natural function into that which is against nature.
Rom 1:27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural function of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another, men doing what is inappropriate with men, and receiving in themselves the due penalty of their error.
Rom 1:28 Even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil habits, secret slanderers,
Rom 1:30 backbiters, hateful to God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, unforgiving, unmerciful;
Rom 1:32 who, knowing the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also approve of those who practice them.
Racin77db:
As far as Jesus being married there is no basis of this in or outside of Scripture. Peter is known to have been married and is written of in the Word, as marriage is a glorious event and Life in God's sight and that this is the primary image of Christ and His Love for His Bride. His Bride is the body of Christ, and this is the absolute reason that He would have never been married as it was not part of the Father's plan as His Bride still awaits the Bridegroom's return.
I refused to read your post due to the lack of facts. You just turned to a page in the bible to justify what you cannot explain using the creative side of your mind. I do not believe in the bible, and am verbally violent against christian's that invade me. I never, never go around telling them the word of ODIN, because no one will give a shit. To them, paganism is silly. To me, chrisianity, mormanism, catholicism, etc. is all jewish paganism. I hate it.
I am a euro man, and I follow the same gods my ancestors did before christianity even existed. You are wasting your time by argueing with me, millionman.
In all honesty I respect you for trying to convert people, but you need to go easy. If you were in my house acting like that, I would take action....if you catch my drifter. When the people of god invaded scandinavia, we gave you hell. You lit us on fire, burning high at the stakes with the love of christ were the people of ODIN. I am still standing here, centuries have passed, mighty were the fathers of the norsemen....and in myself, they have returned. I am a fucking Viking, and no man of god will change my ways.
I am a euro man, and I follow the same gods my ancestors did before christianity even existed. You are wasting your time by argueing with me, millionman.
In all honesty I respect you for trying to convert people, but you need to go easy. If you were in my house acting like that, I would take action....if you catch my drifter. When the people of god invaded scandinavia, we gave you hell. You lit us on fire, burning high at the stakes with the love of christ were the people of ODIN. I am still standing here, centuries have passed, mighty were the fathers of the norsemen....and in myself, they have returned. I am a fucking Viking, and no man of god will change my ways.
Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to promise.
Jesus was Jewish as to fulfill the Prophecy's in regards to Him and his existence. He was not jewish to separate anyone, and the Apostle Paul makes that quite clear as seen in the above text from Galatians 3:28-29. Here is an instance of Peter speaking at the home of a gentile man and is proclaiming the Truth of no division between Jew and Gentile:
Act 10:34 Peter opened his mouth and said, "Truly I perceive that God doesn't show favoritism;
Act 10:35 but in every nation he who fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.
Act 10:36 The word which he sent to the children of Israel, preaching good news of peace by Jesus Christ-he is Lord of all-
Act 10:37 that spoken word you yourselves know, which was proclaimed throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
Act 10:38 even Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed him with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.
Act 10:39 We are witnesses of everything he did both in the country of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they also killed, hanging him on a tree.
Act 10:40 God raised him up the third day, and gave him to be revealed,
Act 10:41 not to all the people, but to witnesses who were chosen before by God, to us, who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.
Act 10:42 He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that this is he who is appointed by God as the Judge of the living and the dead.
Act 10:43 All the prophets testify about him, that through his name everyone who believes in him will receive remission of sins."
Act 10:44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell on all those who heard the word.
Act 10:45 They of the circumcision who believed were amazed, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was also poured out on the Gentiles.
Act 10:46 For they heard them speaking in other languages and magnifying God. Then Peter answered,
Act 10:47 "Can any man forbid the water, that these who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we should not be baptized?"
Act 10:48 He commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay some days.
We do not hate anyone; we are here to love and to annoint with oil. We are not here to condemn into Hell but to give the gift of Life through our Lord and savior Jesus Christ, that none should experience damnation but come to a saving Grace of Jesus Christ. Let all come and receive Him that they too would receive Life everlasting, and release from the bonds of this world and live freely.
Yes I turn to the SWORD of the Lord. I could use my mind to refute whatever comes up as an issue, as I understand the facts and can argue for them, but I choose to not venture of the Rock of the Lord which is Jesus Christ. I have read of Odin and the violvent nature of this pagan belief system, and you are wrong in believing that it were Christians who burned the norsemen. There were times of war between the norse and the english, also norsemen and other scandinavian people did battle throughout the years as well. As I understand it, the christians were the ones that were burned by the norsemen, not the other way around. If you are referring to the inquisition or the crusades these were not led by christians but by the Catholic regime that in no way represents the House of the Lord, and again you can learn about this by looking into their theology.
Millionman,
Really...do you realize how absurd you look right now? Some friendly advice: give it a rest. This is a Penis Enlargement website, not your bully pulpit.
God loves you man, be happy with that.
Peace
Pri
Really...do you realize how absurd you look right now? Some friendly advice: give it a rest. This is a Penis Enlargement website, not your bully pulpit.
God loves you man, be happy with that.
Peace
Pri
Jesus in his time contradicted everything that existed. He was trying to inaugurate a new way of living with the potential to put war and prejudice away completely. He replaced the old testament's "eye for an eye" with "love your enemy" , he let women minister along side him, and that was really radical considering at that time women were second class citizens. Jesus would without a doubt in my mind deal with these religious leaders today the exact same way he delt with the pharisses and saducees. I think the church is just society-sanctioned brainwashing, you dont have to bow down and worship a piece of wood to follow Jesus. A piece of wood in the shape of a cross means nothing. A cross is not the Christ. Over 10,000 criminals were crucified on crosses during Jesus' lifetime.
Priap, one question, who am I bullying? Do you feel bullied? You shouldn't, but my friend Truth is Truth. For many men on this website the point out many things about Christ but the question is do they know anything about Him other than what someone told them. I'm not telling them anything, that's why I am posting from the Word. I am not venturing into this is what I say or this is what I think, this is WHAT IS!!! There is a tremendous difference between speaking from a pulpit and speaking to men where they are. I am not elevating myself above anyone or proclaiming that I have some insight into the other realm that is earth shattering or so striking that someone would absolutely listen to me. I am presenting the Truth as it is, as it can be verified through the original texts of Greek and Hebrew that what I am posting are the words of the God-Man Jesus, and His Apostles and what they truly say vs. what the gathering together of what is known as "church" says as the truth. From what I have read from the men in this thread alone that many have never been told about Christ as He is, not as someone might think him to be or may perceive him to be.
I fully understand that this is a Penis Enlargement website, but in all honesty why would that bother me. Jesus hung out with tax-collectors, fisher men, liars, cheats, and thieves. So why would I not share the Truth on this website? There's nothing wrong with sharing on this website is there? Other people can post their beliefs, why shouldn't I? Am I limited because what I have to say burns men to their innermost being? Am I limited because these words carry weight and can change a man's life in an instant? Why should I be kept quiet, but everyone else has free reign? I can tell you why, it is because the name of Jesus Christ offends, the cross offends, and the offer of salvation offends, because it's hard. It's not an easy walk of Faith, it requires much but much was given so that I may have the chance to go before the Father, so that I may dwell in His heaven. I am fortunate enough to be able to say anything of the Lord, but I pray his blessings to all of you. Now why would anyone want me to be silenced, if they can gain eternal salvation but did not know how it was obtained? It costs nothing and is freely given. So why would someone not want something free that would change them inside and out, and turn everything upside down and inside out, that everything would become new and fresh. I've lived this, my world has been turned all kinds of ways and it has been the greatest time of my life and my friends it is so much better than I imagined, but it costs. It's not an easy road, but Christ has walked this path and that we walk with Him and give up ourselves so that He is Lord and releases us from the bondage of sin and shame, so that we can walk freely with no burdens of tomorrow or the next day, but everyday is brand new and having Faith in Him and His Life is a blessing to me and to all that would receive Him. That is the Truth, and I am living proof.
I fully understand that this is a Penis Enlargement website, but in all honesty why would that bother me. Jesus hung out with tax-collectors, fisher men, liars, cheats, and thieves. So why would I not share the Truth on this website? There's nothing wrong with sharing on this website is there? Other people can post their beliefs, why shouldn't I? Am I limited because what I have to say burns men to their innermost being? Am I limited because these words carry weight and can change a man's life in an instant? Why should I be kept quiet, but everyone else has free reign? I can tell you why, it is because the name of Jesus Christ offends, the cross offends, and the offer of salvation offends, because it's hard. It's not an easy walk of Faith, it requires much but much was given so that I may have the chance to go before the Father, so that I may dwell in His heaven. I am fortunate enough to be able to say anything of the Lord, but I pray his blessings to all of you. Now why would anyone want me to be silenced, if they can gain eternal salvation but did not know how it was obtained? It costs nothing and is freely given. So why would someone not want something free that would change them inside and out, and turn everything upside down and inside out, that everything would become new and fresh. I've lived this, my world has been turned all kinds of ways and it has been the greatest time of my life and my friends it is so much better than I imagined, but it costs. It's not an easy road, but Christ has walked this path and that we walk with Him and give up ourselves so that He is Lord and releases us from the bondage of sin and shame, so that we can walk freely with no burdens of tomorrow or the next day, but everyday is brand new and having Faith in Him and His Life is a blessing to me and to all that would receive Him. That is the Truth, and I am living proof.
Last edited:
Millionman, You sound as if you are absolutely certain about all of these things. You sound as if you believe that there is no way that you could be wrong. You can justify this by quoting a book (the Bible) but I could quote a book that goes against everything that you say.
I realize that you believe that the Bible is sacred and is the truth but what if I had a book which I believed to be the same thing i.e the Koran. We would both be entirely sure that what we knew was the only truth and that the other was being unholy.
Then we would start to argue and because we were both sooo sure that we are right in the name of Allah or the Lord we would fight and kill each other. In doing so we would go against the precise message of both of the books that we have read and obviously misunderstood.
It is this arrogant, narrow minded attitude that has caused so many deaths in the past and I am sure will continue to.
I really hope that you can open your mind and try to understand that you have faith. Which in it's self is not at all a bad thing but it is faith and you cannot prove that you are right you can only believe it. It is important to understand that you could be wrong and therefore become a little more tolerant of other peoples opinions.
The real bad things that happen are death and suffering and most of them have come from wars which were carried out by people that misunderstood religion.
I realize that you believe that the Bible is sacred and is the truth but what if I had a book which I believed to be the same thing i.e the Koran. We would both be entirely sure that what we knew was the only truth and that the other was being unholy.
Then we would start to argue and because we were both sooo sure that we are right in the name of Allah or the Lord we would fight and kill each other. In doing so we would go against the precise message of both of the books that we have read and obviously misunderstood.
It is this arrogant, narrow minded attitude that has caused so many deaths in the past and I am sure will continue to.
I really hope that you can open your mind and try to understand that you have faith. Which in it's self is not at all a bad thing but it is faith and you cannot prove that you are right you can only believe it. It is important to understand that you could be wrong and therefore become a little more tolerant of other peoples opinions.
The real bad things that happen are death and suffering and most of them have come from wars which were carried out by people that misunderstood religion.
Millionman, to say that Islam is based on violence and hatred for others is just plain ignorance. How many Muslims do you personally know?
million,
Preach on brother.
Million made an interesting thread, with the proper title, etc. Pretty good stuff, which brought in a lot of other posts. So what's wrong with that. It just appears to have made several guys uncomfortable. Discomfort can be good.
I actually did not read all of million's Bible sitings. I have read them all before, and know of what he writes. What is interesting to me is that the replies to million are all extremely predictable, given that the Bible lays out each of these 'points of view' in one place or another. IOW, not only does the Bible, especially Jesus' words, show the right way to live, but it also tells how men will twist things to avoid the word, or to ignore it. It has all been predicted. I find that interesting.
Bigger
Preach on brother.
Million made an interesting thread, with the proper title, etc. Pretty good stuff, which brought in a lot of other posts. So what's wrong with that. It just appears to have made several guys uncomfortable. Discomfort can be good.
I actually did not read all of million's Bible sitings. I have read them all before, and know of what he writes. What is interesting to me is that the replies to million are all extremely predictable, given that the Bible lays out each of these 'points of view' in one place or another. IOW, not only does the Bible, especially Jesus' words, show the right way to live, but it also tells how men will twist things to avoid the word, or to ignore it. It has all been predicted. I find that interesting.
Bigger
German Stallion
Super Moderator
Million...your posts are right on target. Most people who are so against Christ and the things of the Lord confuse "RELIGION" with knowing Christ. Facts about Bible and Truth are different than "Religion." GS
German Stallion
Super Moderator
philadelph said:
Million is correct. Have you read the Koran? Have you read the teaching of Islam? Doesn't matter how many we know, it is what we know about their belief. GS
Hi guys,
Let me preface this by saying that I am not going to mention my faith in this post... I am of a school that believes that your acts, not your words/quotations/affiliations show your true colors.
That being said, sadly, Million does not have an accurate handle on Islam. Why should he? He has a very strong faith in a brand of Christianity that puts a strong emphasis on conversion and testimony. By definition, genuine investigation into other faiths is prohibited. Very often, in our own spirituality, we have to choose to follow one path or another. Once you make that choice, HUMAN nature is to defend your position and to dismiss others. When you couple that with the directive to preach and "save" others, you end up with what we are seeing here. I applaud Million for his fervor...
That being said, Through my profession and exposure in life, I have met many people in my life. More Christians than Muslim... and those who followed Islam, as an aggregate group, were more "Christian" than the Christians I knew. (By Christian I mean Loving, kind, forgiving, pious, giving etc. They had great respect for Mary. (BTW: Mary is mentioned more times in the Koran as the Mother of Christ than in the Bible...))
Note that I am not defining Christian as those who believe in Jesus as son of god or are evangelic about Christanity. That would be a silly definition, because then, all you would need to do to be a good Christian is Believe in Christ and talk alot about him. Anyone who has read the Bible knows that there is much more to ALL forms of Christianity than that. (Unless they choose to ignore much of what is written in the new testament.)
Thankfully, this thread has chosen to ignore the multitude of other faiths
And, before it comes up. Yes, I have read the Koran, the Old Testament, The New Testament, the Torah, Buddhist Sutra, The Bhagvad Gita... etc.
Let me preface this by saying that I am not going to mention my faith in this post... I am of a school that believes that your acts, not your words/quotations/affiliations show your true colors.
That being said, sadly, Million does not have an accurate handle on Islam. Why should he? He has a very strong faith in a brand of Christianity that puts a strong emphasis on conversion and testimony. By definition, genuine investigation into other faiths is prohibited. Very often, in our own spirituality, we have to choose to follow one path or another. Once you make that choice, HUMAN nature is to defend your position and to dismiss others. When you couple that with the directive to preach and "save" others, you end up with what we are seeing here. I applaud Million for his fervor...
That being said, Through my profession and exposure in life, I have met many people in my life. More Christians than Muslim... and those who followed Islam, as an aggregate group, were more "Christian" than the Christians I knew. (By Christian I mean Loving, kind, forgiving, pious, giving etc. They had great respect for Mary. (BTW: Mary is mentioned more times in the Koran as the Mother of Christ than in the Bible...))
Note that I am not defining Christian as those who believe in Jesus as son of god or are evangelic about Christanity. That would be a silly definition, because then, all you would need to do to be a good Christian is Believe in Christ and talk alot about him. Anyone who has read the Bible knows that there is much more to ALL forms of Christianity than that. (Unless they choose to ignore much of what is written in the new testament.)
Thankfully, this thread has chosen to ignore the multitude of other faiths
And, before it comes up. Yes, I have read the Koran, the Old Testament, The New Testament, the Torah, Buddhist Sutra, The Bhagvad Gita... etc.
The historical Jesus?
I was also raised a Unitarian but was sent to Catholic school from grades three through eight. Weird combo I know.
I like Jesus. Took a lot of balls to stand up for his beliefs and I think his messages of love and the Golden Rule are worth attention. He was a good man who loved children, the poor, the sick, and gave these people hope when they had none before. He certainly practiced what he preached and died for it.
The Jesus we know in the New Testament is rather different from the Jesus described by contemporary sources. We know that Jesus lived not only from the Bible but from Josephus, a contemporary historian. If you read the Gnostic gospels of Mary, Thomas, and Philip, you get a picture of Jesus as a radical who really did threaten the rule of Rome and, particularly, Herod. You also find some extremely strong hints that Jesus was indeed married to the Magdalene who was not a whore but from a prominent family of priests. Jesus came from the house of David and though poor he was an aristocrat of sorts. In America it's hard to imagine that someone poor would have high status but in the rest of the world birth counts for nearly everything. Take a look at the Gnostic gospels. They were written at the time of Jesus and Thomas in particular seems to quote Jesus as a biographer would quote his subject.
Some of the more intense things:
Clearly, this Jesus wasn't the pastoral, sanitized Jesus we get in the New Testament. Jesus was a rabble rouser, speaking sometimes in riddles and sometimes in highly abstract concepts. He appears to have been openly hostile to both the religious and secular governments and preached blasphemous teachings. I would very much have liked to know him and see how the history compares with the reality.
I was also raised a Unitarian but was sent to Catholic school from grades three through eight. Weird combo I know.
I like Jesus. Took a lot of balls to stand up for his beliefs and I think his messages of love and the Golden Rule are worth attention. He was a good man who loved children, the poor, the sick, and gave these people hope when they had none before. He certainly practiced what he preached and died for it.
The Jesus we know in the New Testament is rather different from the Jesus described by contemporary sources. We know that Jesus lived not only from the Bible but from Josephus, a contemporary historian. If you read the Gnostic gospels of Mary, Thomas, and Philip, you get a picture of Jesus as a radical who really did threaten the rule of Rome and, particularly, Herod. You also find some extremely strong hints that Jesus was indeed married to the Magdalene who was not a whore but from a prominent family of priests. Jesus came from the house of David and though poor he was an aristocrat of sorts. In America it's hard to imagine that someone poor would have high status but in the rest of the world birth counts for nearly everything. Take a look at the Gnostic gospels. They were written at the time of Jesus and Thomas in particular seems to quote Jesus as a biographer would quote his subject.
Some of the more intense things:
Clearly, this Jesus wasn't the pastoral, sanitized Jesus we get in the New Testament. Jesus was a rabble rouser, speaking sometimes in riddles and sometimes in highly abstract concepts. He appears to have been openly hostile to both the religious and secular governments and preached blasphemous teachings. I would very much have liked to know him and see how the history compares with the reality.
As to the Koran...
Most non-Muslims are conflicted about just what Islam believes. I know Muslims and I don't believe any of them follow the Koran literally despite what it says. In fact I know a Sufi who would be persecuted in his homeland for his adherence to Sufism. What gives non-Muslims pause are the lines that are quoted from the Koran and, apparently, the words of Mohammed. It's difficult to understand when the headlines are full of radical Muslims promoting terrorism and using the Koran to justify it. Similarly, Muslims aren't speaking out loud enough against terrorism. American Muslim leaders should know they need to get out there and tell America, and the rest of the world, that they do not support Muslim extremism.
Here are some quotes from the Koran that need pondering:
:O
This is, uh, disturbing. Now I know full well that there are quotes from the Old Testament equally as awful but Christians will state that their god is that of the New Testament and, in any event, you haven't seen Christians running around blowing themselves to bits or making holy war in quite a few centuries. We don't see images of people from other faiths dressing their children in little "human bomb" uniforms or mothers saying they hope their child grows up to be a suicide bomber. We don't see non-Muslims flying planes into buildings, chanting "Death to America" in the streets, or cheering at the collapse of the WTC.
Mohammed led armies in war. The idea that a religious leader would lead a war is antithetical to the other large world religions where peace and the Golden Rule are the overriding philosophies.
Non-Mulsims, and in particular the people of the nations targeted by Muslim terrorists, need answers to these outstanding issues lest the divide between Islam and the rest of the world become so great that Islam itself becomes a byword for hate, murder, zealotry, and terrorism.
Most non-Muslims are conflicted about just what Islam believes. I know Muslims and I don't believe any of them follow the Koran literally despite what it says. In fact I know a Sufi who would be persecuted in his homeland for his adherence to Sufism. What gives non-Muslims pause are the lines that are quoted from the Koran and, apparently, the words of Mohammed. It's difficult to understand when the headlines are full of radical Muslims promoting terrorism and using the Koran to justify it. Similarly, Muslims aren't speaking out loud enough against terrorism. American Muslim leaders should know they need to get out there and tell America, and the rest of the world, that they do not support Muslim extremism.
Here are some quotes from the Koran that need pondering:
:O
This is, uh, disturbing. Now I know full well that there are quotes from the Old Testament equally as awful but Christians will state that their god is that of the New Testament and, in any event, you haven't seen Christians running around blowing themselves to bits or making holy war in quite a few centuries. We don't see images of people from other faiths dressing their children in little "human bomb" uniforms or mothers saying they hope their child grows up to be a suicide bomber. We don't see non-Muslims flying planes into buildings, chanting "Death to America" in the streets, or cheering at the collapse of the WTC.
Mohammed led armies in war. The idea that a religious leader would lead a war is antithetical to the other large world religions where peace and the Golden Rule are the overriding philosophies.
Non-Mulsims, and in particular the people of the nations targeted by Muslim terrorists, need answers to these outstanding issues lest the divide between Islam and the rest of the world become so great that Islam itself becomes a byword for hate, murder, zealotry, and terrorism.
German Stallion said:
Sure, a literal reading of either the Koran or the Bible could be construed as violent. To say it is based on this, and pull a few war-like scriptures means nothing. And yes, I have studied the Koran, and written a short paper examining these issues.
I do believe that the Koran, when read by extremist militant groups, could be dangerous, but the Bible can be used for evil as well.
I'm posting an article about the Anti-Israel protests lead over in LONDON which is supposedly a peaceful place similar to America in regards to "friendly" muslims. If you do a study of Islam you will clearly see that it was used as a means of control over the nations that were conquered by the Arab armies, and can be traced directly back to the sun god. Check this link and read a bit on the history of Islam: http://www.chick.com/information/religions/islam/allah.asp
Calls for Israel's destruction in London
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yaakov Lappin, THE JERUSALEM POST May. 22, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A central London rally organized by the British Palestine Solidarity Campaign on Saturday heard Respect Party MP George Galloway advocate a general boycott of Israel, as well as other speeches calling for Israel's destruction.
Dark gray clouds poured heavy rain on London's Trafalgar Square, as a crowd waving Palestine flags and anti-Israel banners filled the square to hear speakers shout vitriolic anti-Israel speeches. Demonstrators chanted Islamic slogans and flags calling for "victory to the intifada" were waved. Leading figures in Britain's anti-Israel coalition also lined up to attack Israel.
Andrew Birgin, of the Stop the War Coalition, urged the destruction of the State of Israel. "Israel is a racist state! It is an apartheid state! With its Apache helicopters and its F-16 fighter jets! The South African apartheid state never inflicted the sort of repression that Israel is inflicting on the Palestinians," he said to loud applause. "When there is real democracy, there will be no more Israel!" concluded Birgin. "Allahu Akbar!" yelled several men repeatedly in response.
Speaking to The Jerusalem Post, Birgin said he was referring to Israel "in the sense that it exists now," and said he wanted to see a "democratic secular state in which peace can move forward."
The Palestinian representative to the UK, Husam Zomlot, also addressed the rally.
"As we speak today, the Israelis are continuing the ethnic cleansing campaign they started in 1948," he said. "To the Israelis, I say that there will absolutely be no peace without the right of return." "The right of return is non-negotiable! Apartheid no more!" exclaimed Zomlot.
"We urge our government to cease all trade with Israel," said Jeremy Corbyn, a backbench Labor MP, who went on to express support for nuclear spy Mordechai Vanunu.
Former Labor MP Tony Benn said that "the apartheid wall should be removed," referring to the security fence built by Israel to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from reaching Israeli cities.
Calling American president George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon the "two most dangerous men in the world," Benn condemned America's military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, and Israel's anti-terrorism measures.
"My dear friends, if this process continues, there will be possibly some sort of a world war," said Benn. "We are talking about respect for international law," he added.
Paul Mackney, president of Britain's second largest university teachers' union, NATPHE, also spoke to the rally. "We stand in solidarity with our Palestinian brothers and sisters. Palestinian refugee camps are like open air prisons," said Mackney. "The Israeli army frequently invades them. There will be no peace in the Middle East until there is justice for the Palestinian people.
"We are calling on all unions to join us," he added. There has been speculation that NATPHE may hold a vote in its upcoming meeting to join the AUT's boycott of Israeli universities.
Galloway, the newly elected MP for the anti-Iraq war Respect Party, used the rally as an attempt to launch an international boycott of Israel.
"It's about time that the British government made some reparations for the Balfour declaration," said Galloway. "Instead, Tony Blair said that Israel has no better friend than the British government. We say to Mr. Blair: You should be ashamed by that.
"The Palestinian people are like the 300 Spartans holding the pass of Thermopylae, until the others can arrive and come to their side. We will join them, by boycotting Israel. By boycotting Israeli goods. By picketing the stores that are selling Israeli goods," he said to cheers and applause.
Azzam Tamimi, head of the Muslim Association of Britain, delivered an Islamist speech, guided by an ideology that rejects nation states in favor of a global Islamic state. "There are 22 stupid Arab states, why have another stupid Palestinian state?" he asked. "I don't want another Palestinian state, I want Jaffa free, I want Haifa free, I want every inch of Palestine free!
"I don't want to see any form of racist nationalism. And the most racist form of nationalism is Zionism. The problem is with a nationalist ideology that is the most racist on the face of the earth."
Stuart Pexley, a former Catholic bishop, and a member of Pax Christi, said: "Jesus Christ attempted to create a new humanity without divisions. As a Christian I am opposed to the apartheid wall."
"This morning we've had a message from the Palestine General Federation of Trade Unions, saying they support the AUT boycott, and call for the May 26 AUT conference to boycott Haifa and Bar-Ilan University," said Corbyn, before introducing Sue Blackwell, the Birmingham lecturer who presented anti-Israel boycott motions passed by the Association of University Teachers last month.
Blackwell attacked opponents to the boycott of Israeli universities, listing the Board of Deputies, the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Congress.
"We can't expel anyone from the union for breaking the boycott, so why is it that the whole world has gone completely hysterical?" she asked.
She bitterly criticized the upcoming emergency May 26 AUT meeting which will vote on a motion to overturn the boycotts. "When the issue is Israel, suddenly the procedures of the union are undemocratic, and a special meeting of the council has to be called, in over to overturn the motion. Comrades, it's not us who are making a special case for Israel, it's the people who lost the vote who are," said Blackwell.
"I'm not very optimistic about the outcome," she added "We are up against a backlash, being promoted by a well-organized, well-funded pro-Israeli lobby." Blackwell also attacked the University of Haifa, and accused it of holding a "racist conference on Arab demographics."
"I stand absolutely by every word in the motion. What we said about Haifa is an understatement. This is a university, which just hosted a conference, two days after the anniversary of the Nakba, entitled 'The demographic problem.' Brothers and sisters, a university which organizes a racist conference as Haifa has just done deserves every bit of trouble it gets from trade unionists in the UK."
"We did not defame Haifa, but what is defamatory is attacks in the press calling us anti-Semitic," said Blackwell.
Speaking to the Post about links on her personal homepage to neo-Nazi Web sites, she described as "defamatory rubbish" the article that exposed them. Blackwell promised to "make a statement" to the Post about the links, which she has since removed, in the near future.
The rally was also attended by members of the fringe anti-Zionist haredi Natorei Karta sect, who held signs which read: "Palestine from the Jordan River to the Sea." "We are abiding by the Torah," said one member. "They [the Israelis] have no right to exist. Israel will fail. Before Israel, Jews were living well in Arab countries," he added.
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1116642367186
anti-semitism is growing exponentially these days.
In regards to my own personal studies, I have read the Book of Mormon. I've spent time reading a bit of Buddhist teachings back when I was a bit younger and exploring, as well as looking into Confuscian ideals. I had to findout for myself, and by experiencing God first hand, baring witness to things that can not be explained such as blind seeing, the crippled walking, things of this nature still exist in our current day. My Faith in Yahweh has only been increased because of these things, but I had come to Faith in him before this. These things have only occurred recently, and I have stood amazed at what He has done, and I look forward to seeing even greater things than this.
The gnostic "gospels" were not authored by the people that they are named for, and this my friend is fact. Written over 100 years after Christ death and some not authenticated until 300 years after can not stand in the same arena with the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These four are accepted as being written between a period between 31 ad - 65 ad. The number of copies of these gospels is so numerous that they outnumber the closest competitor (Alexander the Great's biography) by more than 100,000. You do not have to take my word for this but search out for the info, and if you want a good resource for it check out The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel who's desire for this book was to completely undeify Christ but also to prove He never existed, good read as Mr. Strobel interviews men who have spent years on the subjects adressed in this book.
I also would like to point out that it was not Jesus who was thought to have been a political radical but Josephus mentions Christ because of the rabble rouser John the Baptist who was known for his direct speech and also for living out in the wilderness as the wild prophet of God. John the Baptist was the man who cleaned the way for Jesus Christ, and they were indeed cousins. God is awesome in all ways may we bless His name before all men, and proclaim the Kingdom of God.
Calls for Israel's destruction in London
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yaakov Lappin, THE JERUSALEM POST May. 22, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A central London rally organized by the British Palestine Solidarity Campaign on Saturday heard Respect Party MP George Galloway advocate a general boycott of Israel, as well as other speeches calling for Israel's destruction.
Dark gray clouds poured heavy rain on London's Trafalgar Square, as a crowd waving Palestine flags and anti-Israel banners filled the square to hear speakers shout vitriolic anti-Israel speeches. Demonstrators chanted Islamic slogans and flags calling for "victory to the intifada" were waved. Leading figures in Britain's anti-Israel coalition also lined up to attack Israel.
Andrew Birgin, of the Stop the War Coalition, urged the destruction of the State of Israel. "Israel is a racist state! It is an apartheid state! With its Apache helicopters and its F-16 fighter jets! The South African apartheid state never inflicted the sort of repression that Israel is inflicting on the Palestinians," he said to loud applause. "When there is real democracy, there will be no more Israel!" concluded Birgin. "Allahu Akbar!" yelled several men repeatedly in response.
Speaking to The Jerusalem Post, Birgin said he was referring to Israel "in the sense that it exists now," and said he wanted to see a "democratic secular state in which peace can move forward."
The Palestinian representative to the UK, Husam Zomlot, also addressed the rally.
"As we speak today, the Israelis are continuing the ethnic cleansing campaign they started in 1948," he said. "To the Israelis, I say that there will absolutely be no peace without the right of return." "The right of return is non-negotiable! Apartheid no more!" exclaimed Zomlot.
"We urge our government to cease all trade with Israel," said Jeremy Corbyn, a backbench Labor MP, who went on to express support for nuclear spy Mordechai Vanunu.
Former Labor MP Tony Benn said that "the apartheid wall should be removed," referring to the security fence built by Israel to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from reaching Israeli cities.
Calling American president George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon the "two most dangerous men in the world," Benn condemned America's military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, and Israel's anti-terrorism measures.
"My dear friends, if this process continues, there will be possibly some sort of a world war," said Benn. "We are talking about respect for international law," he added.
Paul Mackney, president of Britain's second largest university teachers' union, NATPHE, also spoke to the rally. "We stand in solidarity with our Palestinian brothers and sisters. Palestinian refugee camps are like open air prisons," said Mackney. "The Israeli army frequently invades them. There will be no peace in the Middle East until there is justice for the Palestinian people.
"We are calling on all unions to join us," he added. There has been speculation that NATPHE may hold a vote in its upcoming meeting to join the AUT's boycott of Israeli universities.
Galloway, the newly elected MP for the anti-Iraq war Respect Party, used the rally as an attempt to launch an international boycott of Israel.
"It's about time that the British government made some reparations for the Balfour declaration," said Galloway. "Instead, Tony Blair said that Israel has no better friend than the British government. We say to Mr. Blair: You should be ashamed by that.
"The Palestinian people are like the 300 Spartans holding the pass of Thermopylae, until the others can arrive and come to their side. We will join them, by boycotting Israel. By boycotting Israeli goods. By picketing the stores that are selling Israeli goods," he said to cheers and applause.
Azzam Tamimi, head of the Muslim Association of Britain, delivered an Islamist speech, guided by an ideology that rejects nation states in favor of a global Islamic state. "There are 22 stupid Arab states, why have another stupid Palestinian state?" he asked. "I don't want another Palestinian state, I want Jaffa free, I want Haifa free, I want every inch of Palestine free!
"I don't want to see any form of racist nationalism. And the most racist form of nationalism is Zionism. The problem is with a nationalist ideology that is the most racist on the face of the earth."
Stuart Pexley, a former Catholic bishop, and a member of Pax Christi, said: "Jesus Christ attempted to create a new humanity without divisions. As a Christian I am opposed to the apartheid wall."
"This morning we've had a message from the Palestine General Federation of Trade Unions, saying they support the AUT boycott, and call for the May 26 AUT conference to boycott Haifa and Bar-Ilan University," said Corbyn, before introducing Sue Blackwell, the Birmingham lecturer who presented anti-Israel boycott motions passed by the Association of University Teachers last month.
Blackwell attacked opponents to the boycott of Israeli universities, listing the Board of Deputies, the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Congress.
"We can't expel anyone from the union for breaking the boycott, so why is it that the whole world has gone completely hysterical?" she asked.
She bitterly criticized the upcoming emergency May 26 AUT meeting which will vote on a motion to overturn the boycotts. "When the issue is Israel, suddenly the procedures of the union are undemocratic, and a special meeting of the council has to be called, in over to overturn the motion. Comrades, it's not us who are making a special case for Israel, it's the people who lost the vote who are," said Blackwell.
"I'm not very optimistic about the outcome," she added "We are up against a backlash, being promoted by a well-organized, well-funded pro-Israeli lobby." Blackwell also attacked the University of Haifa, and accused it of holding a "racist conference on Arab demographics."
"I stand absolutely by every word in the motion. What we said about Haifa is an understatement. This is a university, which just hosted a conference, two days after the anniversary of the Nakba, entitled 'The demographic problem.' Brothers and sisters, a university which organizes a racist conference as Haifa has just done deserves every bit of trouble it gets from trade unionists in the UK."
"We did not defame Haifa, but what is defamatory is attacks in the press calling us anti-Semitic," said Blackwell.
Speaking to the Post about links on her personal homepage to neo-Nazi Web sites, she described as "defamatory rubbish" the article that exposed them. Blackwell promised to "make a statement" to the Post about the links, which she has since removed, in the near future.
The rally was also attended by members of the fringe anti-Zionist haredi Natorei Karta sect, who held signs which read: "Palestine from the Jordan River to the Sea." "We are abiding by the Torah," said one member. "They [the Israelis] have no right to exist. Israel will fail. Before Israel, Jews were living well in Arab countries," he added.
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1116642367186
anti-semitism is growing exponentially these days.
In regards to my own personal studies, I have read the Book of Mormon. I've spent time reading a bit of Buddhist teachings back when I was a bit younger and exploring, as well as looking into Confuscian ideals. I had to findout for myself, and by experiencing God first hand, baring witness to things that can not be explained such as blind seeing, the crippled walking, things of this nature still exist in our current day. My Faith in Yahweh has only been increased because of these things, but I had come to Faith in him before this. These things have only occurred recently, and I have stood amazed at what He has done, and I look forward to seeing even greater things than this.
The gnostic "gospels" were not authored by the people that they are named for, and this my friend is fact. Written over 100 years after Christ death and some not authenticated until 300 years after can not stand in the same arena with the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These four are accepted as being written between a period between 31 ad - 65 ad. The number of copies of these gospels is so numerous that they outnumber the closest competitor (Alexander the Great's biography) by more than 100,000. You do not have to take my word for this but search out for the info, and if you want a good resource for it check out The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel who's desire for this book was to completely undeify Christ but also to prove He never existed, good read as Mr. Strobel interviews men who have spent years on the subjects adressed in this book.
I also would like to point out that it was not Jesus who was thought to have been a political radical but Josephus mentions Christ because of the rabble rouser John the Baptist who was known for his direct speech and also for living out in the wilderness as the wild prophet of God. John the Baptist was the man who cleaned the way for Jesus Christ, and they were indeed cousins. God is awesome in all ways may we bless His name before all men, and proclaim the Kingdom of God.
Jesus was 1 of 3 things...
1) Son of God - What he claimed to be
2) Crazy - Whacko for claiming such things
3) Liar - Like the guy in Waco, TX who ran the cult
You cant "respect" Jesus if you dont agree with what he said. Its illogical. I know I am going to get bashed because I wont join the relativist of whatever someone believes is right to them and whatever I believe is right to me, but anyway, I think he is the Son of God.
BTW, the Bible is the most accurately translated text to date, more accurate than many of Shakespearre's (sp?) works...
1) Son of God - What he claimed to be
2) Crazy - Whacko for claiming such things
3) Liar - Like the guy in Waco, TX who ran the cult
You cant "respect" Jesus if you dont agree with what he said. Its illogical. I know I am going to get bashed because I wont join the relativist of whatever someone believes is right to them and whatever I believe is right to me, but anyway, I think he is the Son of God.
BTW, the Bible is the most accurately translated text to date, more accurate than many of Shakespearre's (sp?) works...
What is even more interesting is the fact "people of god" spread like a fucking plague, have caused millions of deaths, and they call me ignorant. I am an Odinist, and practice what my ancestors of nordic and celtic europe practiced. No christian can tell me to practice otherwise. I am just thankful you christians arent killing us pagans anymore.Bib said:
Brother will kill brother, spilling blood across the land, killing for religion, something I don't understand.
Dave Mustaine, 1990
ACES, you're ignorant as to what true men and women of GOD are like. We aren't the ones who did all the killing and blood spilling. The Catholic Church was and is a huge part of the Apostate church which may include Christ but has nothing to do with what He taught and who He really was. Look into some of these issues, Mary, Crown Vicar of Christ (POPenis Enlargement), infant baptism, Confession, priests and nuns, apostolic sucession, and these are just a few of the things that you could research. The Catholic Church is leading millions of people to the depths because of what they teach, such as the seven necessities of salvation, but Christ said believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that I am LORD and ye shall be saved, and that is all that is required. So they are teaching directly agains what Jesus said, and Christ also said if ye abide in my WORD then ye are my disciple. If abiding in His word is necessary to be a disciple then teaching contrary to it must mean that you are not truly His disciple, and in you shall not listen to such a man or pay his teaching any heed at all, so says the Lord. I know you're not interested in this as you have told me before when I PMed you, but this in all actuality would clear up some of what you think has transpired throughout history but this just is not so. Blessings to you Aces....
A pioneer of Christian happy-talk
Posted: April 23, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
To attract the largest followings possible and because they have bought the lie of the new tolerance, many of America's churches, Christian publishers and Christian radio stations – whether they know it or not – have rejected biblical Christianity and adopted the more popular but bogus gospel of Christian happy-talk. As a result, churches brim with converts committed only to their personal self-actualization, publishers lavish feel-good pabulum on their readers, and the airwaves ring with an emotive rendering of Christianity that would fit nicely alongside the corruptions of faith Jesus chides in the second and third chapters of Revelation.
More than 30 years ago, Vance Havner, in his book "Playing Marbles with Diamonds," offered the following insightful:
The devil is not fighting religion; he is too smart for that. He is producing a counterfeit Christianity so much like the real one that good Christians are afraid to speak out against it. … We are plainly told in the Scriptures that in the last days men will not endure sound doctrine and will depart from the truth and heap to themselves teachers to tickle their ears. We live in an epidemic of this itch, and popular preachers have developed ear-tickling to a fine art. Today, the angle is to avoid "negative" preaching and accentuate only the positive.
Havner wrote at a time when the work of one of America's most influential pioneers of Christian happy-talk was fomenting what is still a powerful factor in the happy-talk world. A follower of Norman Vincent Peale, Robert Schuller has become the face and voice of today's "Christian" self-esteem movement. Of course, there is nothing Christian or biblical about Schuller's self-idolatry message. It is clearly more akin to New Age thinking.
Nevertheless, Schuller is one of America's most well-known TV preachers and authors, and is pastor of arguably the most famous mega-church of all time. In fact, as pastor of The Crystal Cathedral, Schuller claims to be the father of the mega-church movement. In the April 10, 2002, issue of The Christian Century, Schuller claims, "I launched the mega-church movement through the Institute for Successful Church Leadership in 1970."
Many look to Schuller and his church as the model for achieving mega-church status. Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, Bruce Wilkinson and scores of America's best-selling authors and most well-known pastors have either spoken at Schuller's Institute for Successful Church Leadership or attended the conference. Perhaps this explains why so many of these authors avoid in-depth discussions of man's total depravity, the biblical doctrine of repentance, the moral law, or the need to die to self and reject the lie of self-love.
Mega-churches and many "Christian" books today conspire to make people feel good – to be comfortable with themselves. Preaching the cross and our need to die to self does not meet acceptable Christian happy-talk standards. In an interview with Christianity Today, published on Oct. 5, 1984, Robert Schuller noted:
I don't think anything has been done in the name of Christ and under the banner of Christianity that has proven more destructive to human personality and, hence counterproductive to the evangelism enterprise, than the often crude, uncouth and un-Christian strategy of attempting to make people aware of their lost and sinful condition.
In his book "Self-Esteem, the New Reformation," Schuller argues that we now have a far more enlightened understanding of what is really going on in our souls: "Lack of self-love or self-esteem, here is a scientific, scriptural doctrine of original sin."
What Bible is he reading from? According to mine, the original sin of Adam and Eve was a choice of desiring what they – the self – wanted over what God desired for them. Adam and Eve succumbed to Satan's lie of human supremacy, which is to love self to the extent of seeing yourself as god. They also believed the favorite falsehood of humanism that they could be the ones to determine truth and to control their destinies. It was the desire to serve "self," not God, that led to disobedience and the original sin.
Later in his book, Schuller reveals the core of happy-talk teaching: "Let us start with a theology of salvation that addresses itself at the outset to man's deepest need, the 'will to self worth.'" But the truth is, man's deepest need is not "self worth" but forgiveness of sins through repentance and belief in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Unless we die to our own will and the desires of self-love and become alive to Christ and His will, there is no salvation.
When describing salvation, Jesus' words never sounded remotely like those of Robert Schuller. That belies the fact that the messages of Robert Schuller and Jesus Christ are in direct conflict. Jesus spoke about self-denial and dying to self, while Schuller promotes self-worship.
In Luke 14, Jesus describes the actions of a true believer and not once does He commend the need to love one's self. To the contrary, He even calls us to hate our own lives:
If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple.
Luke 9:23-26 is even unhappier in its talk. Jesus enumerates the requirements of His followers, including the need to reject the love of self:
And He was saying to them all, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels."
Elsewhere, the Bible variously calls the works of self "filthy rags," notes that apart from Christ "I am as a little worm," describes people as "children of wrath" before trusting in Jesus Christ, and claims "we were dead in trespasses and sins." The Bible clearly is not high on the virtues of mankind. It says there is "no one good, no not one." Only God and His Son Christ Jesus are without sin.
To teach self-esteem or man's basic goodness is to say that mankind really was not 100 percent in need of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross. The self-esteem movement says people are perhaps good enough to pass through judgment on their own merit. Even if mankind is bad, we're not all that bad – certainly not totally depraved – only in need of a bit of work on the cross to make up for a few little failings, shortcomings and flaws.
To justify their self-love theology, many cite the biblical admonition that we are to love our neighbors as ourselves. They point to Leviticus 19:18 (which Jesus Himself quoted): "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." How, they argue, are we to love our neighbors as ourselves if we do not fully love ourselves? But if you look at Leviticus 19:9-18, the entire list of things God is telling us that we must and must not do falls in the context of how we should treat each other in our daily conduct. The list of requirements never moves from the physical and emotional realm into adjectives or descriptions that involve an inner worship of one another, the affirmation of one another as good, or even as being lovely, lovable or worthy of love. When the admonition is read in context, it is clear that we are to look out for the best interest of others and not simply think only of our own best interests – contrary to the natural, sinful, reflex of every human being.
Robert Schuller, like many of today's liberal pastors, have a strong desire to avoid using the "S" word. In "Self-Esteem, The New Reformation," Schuller writes: "Salvation is defined as rescue from shame to glory. It is salvation from guilt to pride, from fear to love, from distrust to faith, from hypocrisy to honesty." Schuller never uses the word "sin" and says nothing about repentance. This kind of misleading verbiage actually leads people away from salvation, for without acknowledging sin and repenting of that sin, there can be no salvation.
This is quite clear in I John 1:8-10: "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us."
Actually, I should acknowledge that Schuller doesn't' forsake the "S" word entirely. He offers a rather creative re-invention that still shields us from the dark reality of our needs when he writes, "So lack of trust or a lack of self-worth is the central core of sin."
Uh … no. The central core of sin is disobedience toward God and our being in rebellion against His character and nature. The more we focus on self and self-worth, self-importance or our rights, the deeper our offending sin.
Schuller also writes, "Jesus Christ employed a strategy of evangelism where he never called a person a 'sinner.' They were sinners, of course, but he never told them they were."
I repeat: What Bible is that? Jesus not only told His audience He was calling sinners to repentance, but He called some of them names even less flattering than "sinner." How would today's happy-talk audience like to be addressed as "vipers," "serpents" or "tombs"?
In II Timothy 4:3-4, Paul predicted that we would see false teachers like the happy-talk crowd and that many in the audience would eagerly accept their false teachings:
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.
Jesus soundly warns us of the punisHydromaxent that awaits those who add or take away from the Scriptures. He notes that we would be better off to tie a millstone around our necks and jump in a lake rather than to doctrinally deceive children or those that are new to the faith.
Alas, Christian happy-talk has become very profitable. But then what will it really profit anyone to gain the world and lose the soul?
Posted: April 23, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
To attract the largest followings possible and because they have bought the lie of the new tolerance, many of America's churches, Christian publishers and Christian radio stations – whether they know it or not – have rejected biblical Christianity and adopted the more popular but bogus gospel of Christian happy-talk. As a result, churches brim with converts committed only to their personal self-actualization, publishers lavish feel-good pabulum on their readers, and the airwaves ring with an emotive rendering of Christianity that would fit nicely alongside the corruptions of faith Jesus chides in the second and third chapters of Revelation.
More than 30 years ago, Vance Havner, in his book "Playing Marbles with Diamonds," offered the following insightful:
The devil is not fighting religion; he is too smart for that. He is producing a counterfeit Christianity so much like the real one that good Christians are afraid to speak out against it. … We are plainly told in the Scriptures that in the last days men will not endure sound doctrine and will depart from the truth and heap to themselves teachers to tickle their ears. We live in an epidemic of this itch, and popular preachers have developed ear-tickling to a fine art. Today, the angle is to avoid "negative" preaching and accentuate only the positive.
Havner wrote at a time when the work of one of America's most influential pioneers of Christian happy-talk was fomenting what is still a powerful factor in the happy-talk world. A follower of Norman Vincent Peale, Robert Schuller has become the face and voice of today's "Christian" self-esteem movement. Of course, there is nothing Christian or biblical about Schuller's self-idolatry message. It is clearly more akin to New Age thinking.
Nevertheless, Schuller is one of America's most well-known TV preachers and authors, and is pastor of arguably the most famous mega-church of all time. In fact, as pastor of The Crystal Cathedral, Schuller claims to be the father of the mega-church movement. In the April 10, 2002, issue of The Christian Century, Schuller claims, "I launched the mega-church movement through the Institute for Successful Church Leadership in 1970."
Many look to Schuller and his church as the model for achieving mega-church status. Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, Bruce Wilkinson and scores of America's best-selling authors and most well-known pastors have either spoken at Schuller's Institute for Successful Church Leadership or attended the conference. Perhaps this explains why so many of these authors avoid in-depth discussions of man's total depravity, the biblical doctrine of repentance, the moral law, or the need to die to self and reject the lie of self-love.
Mega-churches and many "Christian" books today conspire to make people feel good – to be comfortable with themselves. Preaching the cross and our need to die to self does not meet acceptable Christian happy-talk standards. In an interview with Christianity Today, published on Oct. 5, 1984, Robert Schuller noted:
I don't think anything has been done in the name of Christ and under the banner of Christianity that has proven more destructive to human personality and, hence counterproductive to the evangelism enterprise, than the often crude, uncouth and un-Christian strategy of attempting to make people aware of their lost and sinful condition.
In his book "Self-Esteem, the New Reformation," Schuller argues that we now have a far more enlightened understanding of what is really going on in our souls: "Lack of self-love or self-esteem, here is a scientific, scriptural doctrine of original sin."
What Bible is he reading from? According to mine, the original sin of Adam and Eve was a choice of desiring what they – the self – wanted over what God desired for them. Adam and Eve succumbed to Satan's lie of human supremacy, which is to love self to the extent of seeing yourself as god. They also believed the favorite falsehood of humanism that they could be the ones to determine truth and to control their destinies. It was the desire to serve "self," not God, that led to disobedience and the original sin.
Later in his book, Schuller reveals the core of happy-talk teaching: "Let us start with a theology of salvation that addresses itself at the outset to man's deepest need, the 'will to self worth.'" But the truth is, man's deepest need is not "self worth" but forgiveness of sins through repentance and belief in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Unless we die to our own will and the desires of self-love and become alive to Christ and His will, there is no salvation.
When describing salvation, Jesus' words never sounded remotely like those of Robert Schuller. That belies the fact that the messages of Robert Schuller and Jesus Christ are in direct conflict. Jesus spoke about self-denial and dying to self, while Schuller promotes self-worship.
In Luke 14, Jesus describes the actions of a true believer and not once does He commend the need to love one's self. To the contrary, He even calls us to hate our own lives:
If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple.
Luke 9:23-26 is even unhappier in its talk. Jesus enumerates the requirements of His followers, including the need to reject the love of self:
And He was saying to them all, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels."
Elsewhere, the Bible variously calls the works of self "filthy rags," notes that apart from Christ "I am as a little worm," describes people as "children of wrath" before trusting in Jesus Christ, and claims "we were dead in trespasses and sins." The Bible clearly is not high on the virtues of mankind. It says there is "no one good, no not one." Only God and His Son Christ Jesus are without sin.
To teach self-esteem or man's basic goodness is to say that mankind really was not 100 percent in need of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross. The self-esteem movement says people are perhaps good enough to pass through judgment on their own merit. Even if mankind is bad, we're not all that bad – certainly not totally depraved – only in need of a bit of work on the cross to make up for a few little failings, shortcomings and flaws.
To justify their self-love theology, many cite the biblical admonition that we are to love our neighbors as ourselves. They point to Leviticus 19:18 (which Jesus Himself quoted): "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." How, they argue, are we to love our neighbors as ourselves if we do not fully love ourselves? But if you look at Leviticus 19:9-18, the entire list of things God is telling us that we must and must not do falls in the context of how we should treat each other in our daily conduct. The list of requirements never moves from the physical and emotional realm into adjectives or descriptions that involve an inner worship of one another, the affirmation of one another as good, or even as being lovely, lovable or worthy of love. When the admonition is read in context, it is clear that we are to look out for the best interest of others and not simply think only of our own best interests – contrary to the natural, sinful, reflex of every human being.
Robert Schuller, like many of today's liberal pastors, have a strong desire to avoid using the "S" word. In "Self-Esteem, The New Reformation," Schuller writes: "Salvation is defined as rescue from shame to glory. It is salvation from guilt to pride, from fear to love, from distrust to faith, from hypocrisy to honesty." Schuller never uses the word "sin" and says nothing about repentance. This kind of misleading verbiage actually leads people away from salvation, for without acknowledging sin and repenting of that sin, there can be no salvation.
This is quite clear in I John 1:8-10: "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us."
Actually, I should acknowledge that Schuller doesn't' forsake the "S" word entirely. He offers a rather creative re-invention that still shields us from the dark reality of our needs when he writes, "So lack of trust or a lack of self-worth is the central core of sin."
Uh … no. The central core of sin is disobedience toward God and our being in rebellion against His character and nature. The more we focus on self and self-worth, self-importance or our rights, the deeper our offending sin.
Schuller also writes, "Jesus Christ employed a strategy of evangelism where he never called a person a 'sinner.' They were sinners, of course, but he never told them they were."
I repeat: What Bible is that? Jesus not only told His audience He was calling sinners to repentance, but He called some of them names even less flattering than "sinner." How would today's happy-talk audience like to be addressed as "vipers," "serpents" or "tombs"?
In II Timothy 4:3-4, Paul predicted that we would see false teachers like the happy-talk crowd and that many in the audience would eagerly accept their false teachings:
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.
Jesus soundly warns us of the punisHydromaxent that awaits those who add or take away from the Scriptures. He notes that we would be better off to tie a millstone around our necks and jump in a lake rather than to doctrinally deceive children or those that are new to the faith.
Alas, Christian happy-talk has become very profitable. But then what will it really profit anyone to gain the world and lose the soul?
Galatians 5
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26Let us not become conceited, provoking, and envying each other.
Matthew 7
1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."
Mea culpa
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26Let us not become conceited, provoking, and envying each other.
Matthew 7
1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."
Mea culpa
Hey Priap, could you possibly expand on what you are trying to get across by posting those two scriptures? I can interpret the intent, and in their meaning according to the context of the Word, but what is your intent with them?
millionman said:
Look at the two words at the end of my post.
me·a cul·pa (mā'ə kŭl'pə, mē'ə
pronunciation
n.
An acknowledgment of a personal error or fault.
What would you be apologizing for?
pronunciationn.
An acknowledgment of a personal error or fault.
What would you be apologizing for?
millionman said:me·a cul·pa (mā'ə kŭl'pə, mē'ə
n.
An acknowledgment of a personal error or fault.
What would you be apologizing for?
Millionman, you have my pity.
Why would you pity me?
In the verses you posted the letter to the Galatians is written by the Apostle Paul to a body of believers. They word you have highlghted does not pretain to non-believers. Paul is pointing out that as men of the Spirit we do not live according to the world and we should not act as the world does, and we should treat one another according to the Spirit of the Lord.
In your second posting this is not a chastisement as we are not able to judge, or that we should not judge as you are obviously pointing out. It is the reality that we are called to discernment and honesty in dealing with each other as believers but also as non-believers. Christ's emphasis here is that we would judge according to LOVE and not according to opinion or where you are currently, but there is necessity to judge but to judge according to the Love of Christ as that we would meet them where they are currently, not as a means to discard them and do away with them. It's not about harsh treatment of the individual, this ties in with Christ also saying if you do not forgive men their transgressions I will not forgive yours to the Father. It's all part of Christ command to love the Father with your whole heart, mind, body, and soul and to LOVE as He has loved.
So am I deserving of pity Priap or are you attempting to make these words fit into your own agenda? If it is the latter then my friend I love you and pray that you will see this grievous error, as what you are stating in no way fits into the context of the books as a whole nor is the meaning implied fit into these verses as you have presented them. Christ spoke directly to the sins of the people, to the Samaritan woman He told her that she had lain with many men and that her position was not virtuous or Holy one but that she was forgiven. Is that a judgement, yes but He did so that she might come into relationship with Him. He convicts us of our sins not by harsh judgement as that which God utilized during the Flood but a different judgement that we would be convicted of the sin in our life and walk away from it toward him, not to our own destruction but to eternal life in Him.
In the verses you posted the letter to the Galatians is written by the Apostle Paul to a body of believers. They word you have highlghted does not pretain to non-believers. Paul is pointing out that as men of the Spirit we do not live according to the world and we should not act as the world does, and we should treat one another according to the Spirit of the Lord.
In your second posting this is not a chastisement as we are not able to judge, or that we should not judge as you are obviously pointing out. It is the reality that we are called to discernment and honesty in dealing with each other as believers but also as non-believers. Christ's emphasis here is that we would judge according to LOVE and not according to opinion or where you are currently, but there is necessity to judge but to judge according to the Love of Christ as that we would meet them where they are currently, not as a means to discard them and do away with them. It's not about harsh treatment of the individual, this ties in with Christ also saying if you do not forgive men their transgressions I will not forgive yours to the Father. It's all part of Christ command to love the Father with your whole heart, mind, body, and soul and to LOVE as He has loved.
So am I deserving of pity Priap or are you attempting to make these words fit into your own agenda? If it is the latter then my friend I love you and pray that you will see this grievous error, as what you are stating in no way fits into the context of the books as a whole nor is the meaning implied fit into these verses as you have presented them. Christ spoke directly to the sins of the people, to the Samaritan woman He told her that she had lain with many men and that her position was not virtuous or Holy one but that she was forgiven. Is that a judgement, yes but He did so that she might come into relationship with Him. He convicts us of our sins not by harsh judgement as that which God utilized during the Flood but a different judgement that we would be convicted of the sin in our life and walk away from it toward him, not to our own destruction but to eternal life in Him.
Drop it.
Last edited:
Drop it? Why am I dropping it, all I wanted was for you to make yourself clear, as opposed to being cryptic so that we might be able to converse on this a bit more. I just want a bit of clarification priapologist, that's all. Otherwise it's not conversing and sharing the Love of Christ it's about being right or wrong, and this thread is not about that it's about brining people to see that Christ was no myth, and that He is much more than what "church" makes him out to be. So I am asking you to make yourself clear so that we may openly discuss, let nothing be kept in the dark and bring questions forward and they will be answered and discussed in full view of this forum.
It's clear to me- that Jesus rocks!!
sephin said:
There are a few more options that you are not considering. Jesus could be a myth made up to fufill the messiah prophecy and never have actually existed (midrash). Could have been a normal man who was mythicized, etc. If you see Jesus as some type of mythical figure you can respect the message, even if he never existed. I haven't read the whole NT yet, but the doctrine of hell and self mutilation, I find quite disturbing. I'm unsure he existed, as I have never seen any contemporary accounts for it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence...
9
9cyclops9
Guest
Doctrine of Self Mutilation? I don't think I've ever heard of that one. Could you explain what you mean?
It's a commonly accepted fact among historians that Jesus was in fact a historical figure and that he did exist. There are records from that time period that indicate this.
It's a commonly accepted fact among historians that Jesus was in fact a historical figure and that he did exist. There are records from that time period that indicate this.
9
9cyclops9
Guest
Those passages you're referring aren't intended to be taken literally. What he means is to remove whatever is in your life that's tempting you. For instance, for a while, coming to [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] was tempting me to look at adult entertainment (I had a personal conviction about this, some Christians don't), so I left for a while until I got that part of my life straightened out. This is what the verse means.
As for references, off the top of my head I can think of "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. Strobel had set out to disprove the existence of Christ (which was originally going to be the topic of the book), but through researching for his book he encountered overwhelming evidence that Christ did indeed exist. I believe he has several references in there, but I don't have the book with me at the moment. As far as other references, I'll have to look for that. I'll try to find some over the weekend, or I'm sure other members can point you in the right direction if I don't get to it first.
As for references, off the top of my head I can think of "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. Strobel had set out to disprove the existence of Christ (which was originally going to be the topic of the book), but through researching for his book he encountered overwhelming evidence that Christ did indeed exist. I believe he has several references in there, but I don't have the book with me at the moment. As far as other references, I'll have to look for that. I'll try to find some over the weekend, or I'm sure other members can point you in the right direction if I don't get to it first.
You can always look at the Roman 1st century historian Josephus as an outside source. He is one that is pointed to most often because he lived during the time period, and wrote about Jesus' association with John the Baptist.
As far as these myth ideas, as I have found that anyone who presents this as fact and points to other mythical characers and then proclaim that Christ never existed are ignoring the evidence of Josephus, as well as ignoring the Gospels as historically factual. The four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John are considered by historians to be 99.9% accurate because of the number of original complete texts in Hebrew and Greek. On top of this there are also partial copies that also verify the events occurring as written in the complete texts. The whole presentation made by people that have written books on the topic of the "mythical" Christ present it as fact with no evidence to disprove the above examples, so they do not include this information as to bring about a stronger case for their side, but in the light of this information they have no legs to stand on.
In the case of Liar, Lunatic, or Lord this idea of a mythical Christ is thrown out because of the historical evidence, so it's not even a discussion because the evidence mounts against this train of thought and eleminates it from possibility. So in this regard a man who claimed to be God has only three options. He would be a lunatic, because who runs around claiming to be God's son? He would be a liar, because he's claiming deity but knows he is not and more over why would he knowing the truth go to his own death (again making him crazy). He would be Lord if He claimed to be God accompanied by miraculous signs and wonders (magicians can't raise people from the dead or give the blind sight), He would have to Love unconditionally, and give of Himself to death. That is the requirement of God's word in the prophecies of the Messiah in the Old Testament, which is a very good portion of the Bible and I honestly reccomend anyone wondering about the Christ that would come as there are over 300 prophecies about Him (from what house he would be born, the manner of his birth, manner of death, to even the things he would say). In more than 300 ways Jesus proved Himself to be honest by God's prophetic word, and this is indeed impossible to manufacture. If these things had not occurred the leaders of the day would have stood and said this man is false and is not the Son of God but a liar. They lost their power and influence over the people. This is all worth looking into, no one has to take my word for it. I have no reason to lie to anyone, as I'm not trying to take your money or to tell you life will be easy, or name it and it will be yours. I come to bring the Truth out, and to reveal that the Son of God is the only path to Him. Other than that I have no reason, but that our Father in Heaven be glorified.
As far as these myth ideas, as I have found that anyone who presents this as fact and points to other mythical characers and then proclaim that Christ never existed are ignoring the evidence of Josephus, as well as ignoring the Gospels as historically factual. The four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John are considered by historians to be 99.9% accurate because of the number of original complete texts in Hebrew and Greek. On top of this there are also partial copies that also verify the events occurring as written in the complete texts. The whole presentation made by people that have written books on the topic of the "mythical" Christ present it as fact with no evidence to disprove the above examples, so they do not include this information as to bring about a stronger case for their side, but in the light of this information they have no legs to stand on.
In the case of Liar, Lunatic, or Lord this idea of a mythical Christ is thrown out because of the historical evidence, so it's not even a discussion because the evidence mounts against this train of thought and eleminates it from possibility. So in this regard a man who claimed to be God has only three options. He would be a lunatic, because who runs around claiming to be God's son? He would be a liar, because he's claiming deity but knows he is not and more over why would he knowing the truth go to his own death (again making him crazy). He would be Lord if He claimed to be God accompanied by miraculous signs and wonders (magicians can't raise people from the dead or give the blind sight), He would have to Love unconditionally, and give of Himself to death. That is the requirement of God's word in the prophecies of the Messiah in the Old Testament, which is a very good portion of the Bible and I honestly reccomend anyone wondering about the Christ that would come as there are over 300 prophecies about Him (from what house he would be born, the manner of his birth, manner of death, to even the things he would say). In more than 300 ways Jesus proved Himself to be honest by God's prophetic word, and this is indeed impossible to manufacture. If these things had not occurred the leaders of the day would have stood and said this man is false and is not the Son of God but a liar. They lost their power and influence over the people. This is all worth looking into, no one has to take my word for it. I have no reason to lie to anyone, as I'm not trying to take your money or to tell you life will be easy, or name it and it will be yours. I come to bring the Truth out, and to reveal that the Son of God is the only path to Him. Other than that I have no reason, but that our Father in Heaven be glorified.
9cyclops9: Seems you don't like the implications of taking that literally, so you are reinterpreting it. Problem is if you start taking things as metaphors, you can pick and choose what you like and the bible will conform to your presupposed notions of what you think it says and what god/Jesus are like. From history I know this passage has led to many castrations among other things.
I've read Strobel's 'Case for a Creator', I found it quite poor. Don't know if I could read another of his as I didn't like the style.
Million: Josephus would not be a contemporary source, his writing appears later. Furthermore it would be second hand at best. Lastly, the passage is regarded as a later insertion, so it can't be used as evidence.
The gospels are not historically factual either. They do not agree with each other, even in something as basic as Jesus' decent (I know you'll say one is Mary's line, but I don't think that flies). The gospels were written decades or generations after Jesus' supposed existence according to what I've seen, thus they can't be taken as historical or contemporary accounts. The crucifixion and resurrections stories don't match up either. The supposed slaughter of children King Herod has no historical record. The dead sea scrolls don't include any of the NT from what I've seen, what original texts are you talking of. Also, what historians? I don't think anyone outside of fundamentalists would declare them perfectly historical.
If I suppose he existed, and take up your 3 options. I would conclude that he was a lunatic and a liar. Liar for promising a return within the generation at hand, and lunatic for claiming to be god. As for the 300 prophecies, I can write a book and give lots of predictions then write another where my character fulfills them, has anything miraculous happened? This is how I regard much of the gospels right now. They were midrash, the OT was used as a reference to write a story of the messiah. There are many verses that match right up, such as the Immanuel line in Matthew, it comes from Isaiah IIRC. I noticed a progression in the crucifixion/resurrection story going through the gospels, as if they had to add more to make their story unique. I am astonished there are no accounts of the 'saints that rose from their graves and visited people' (Matthew 27:52-53). If a zombie saint showed up at my door that would be something worth writing down.
Like you I seek truth, and am trying to uncover it. If it leads to christianity, I have no problem with that. I'm a skeptical though, it comes from being a freethinker.
I've read Strobel's 'Case for a Creator', I found it quite poor. Don't know if I could read another of his as I didn't like the style.
Million: Josephus would not be a contemporary source, his writing appears later. Furthermore it would be second hand at best. Lastly, the passage is regarded as a later insertion, so it can't be used as evidence.
The gospels are not historically factual either. They do not agree with each other, even in something as basic as Jesus' decent (I know you'll say one is Mary's line, but I don't think that flies). The gospels were written decades or generations after Jesus' supposed existence according to what I've seen, thus they can't be taken as historical or contemporary accounts. The crucifixion and resurrections stories don't match up either. The supposed slaughter of children King Herod has no historical record. The dead sea scrolls don't include any of the NT from what I've seen, what original texts are you talking of. Also, what historians? I don't think anyone outside of fundamentalists would declare them perfectly historical.
If I suppose he existed, and take up your 3 options. I would conclude that he was a lunatic and a liar. Liar for promising a return within the generation at hand, and lunatic for claiming to be god. As for the 300 prophecies, I can write a book and give lots of predictions then write another where my character fulfills them, has anything miraculous happened? This is how I regard much of the gospels right now. They were midrash, the OT was used as a reference to write a story of the messiah. There are many verses that match right up, such as the Immanuel line in Matthew, it comes from Isaiah IIRC. I noticed a progression in the crucifixion/resurrection story going through the gospels, as if they had to add more to make their story unique. I am astonished there are no accounts of the 'saints that rose from their graves and visited people' (Matthew 27:52-53). If a zombie saint showed up at my door that would be something worth writing down.
Like you I seek truth, and am trying to uncover it. If it leads to christianity, I have no problem with that. I'm a skeptical though, it comes from being a freethinker.
Kraft, the gospels do agree with the lineage of Jesus. What would you suppose they do not agree on? He is of the House of David born to the virgin Mary, as was prophecied about. If you were to look into the historians who have studied the Gospels (original texts) they agree upon their accuracy (there are over 100,000 complete and partial texts) this evidence does not need to be supported by the Dead Sea Scrolls, as these scrolls are from the Essenes who did not exist during the first century.
As far as you saying you could write a story and fitting everything into a nice little package, that's very true. If you wanted people to buy into it though you would make sure that everything fit, and that the subjects were loyal to Jesus throughout that he was a man worth following to the death without hesitation. This is not the case in the Gospels as He was denied three times by Peter, he was also abandoned by all of his disciples during his trial. They would later go to their deaths for Him, but this is not so during the time of his trial as they feared for themselves. You would not include this in your story as it does not emanate power or authority.
As for the Dead saints rising this did occur, as did the earth quake as it was recorded. So would you suppose that the earthquake occurance being wirtten of but the saints not being recorded discredits it, or would people claiming to have seen dead people seem a bit absurd and out there even for the time. I would keep that to myself personally.
As for Josephus his work was written between and compiled during the twenty or so years after his death, and yes it is believed that the portion of the writing where it reads "and many believed him to be the Christ" is an addition in later years, but this is not the portion I am concerned with it is the portion in regards to his association with John the Bpatist who is written about and did indeed exist. So at least one of the NT characters did indeed live during the first century. The Gospels are accepted as being written between 33-65 a.d. The Gospels are to be accepted as accurate by the historical standards set by academics world wide because the biography of Alexander the great is accepted as 66% accurate by the current standard although there is one complete copy and about 1500 partial copies. The number of sources as well as the time frame written are what verify the sources accuracy, but the biography of Alexander was not compiled till nearly 100 years after his death, although it is believed that his biography was being compiled shortly after his death. So the assumption that the Gospels would be considered inaccurate is not fact according to the historical standard that exists in determining the historical accuracy of documents such as these. There has to be a process through which these things are assessed otherwise we could accept nothing as historically accurate, and the events that are believed to have occured would be pure myth as myths do not require a standard, but the events of history do.
Why did you find Strobel's work to be poor? I'll send you a copy of the case for Christ as he deals with men and women who have worked on these very topics for a life's work, and they are the authorities in the areas he is dealing with in his book. He was an atheist at the outset of this book, and wanted to dismantle Christ, which as I can tell you from trying myself it is not an easy task as the evidence substantiates the claim of Jesus Christ existence. It has not ever been successfully done, unless of course the individual writing the discourse sets out with their mind made up as to what they will and won't use as evidence. This is not about presenting a side of a story or defending a position, but about sharing the facts and if the evidence does not support Jesus existence then I will accept that, but in my experience before coming to Christ as Lord and Savior I could not conclude that He did not exist but that He in fact existed, but it was another issue altogether to accept Him as Lord, and that is individual and personal.
How would you explain the Apostle Paul's transition from being a Jewish Pharisee and persecuting Christians, then to being the greatest advocate of Jesus Christ?
As far as you saying you could write a story and fitting everything into a nice little package, that's very true. If you wanted people to buy into it though you would make sure that everything fit, and that the subjects were loyal to Jesus throughout that he was a man worth following to the death without hesitation. This is not the case in the Gospels as He was denied three times by Peter, he was also abandoned by all of his disciples during his trial. They would later go to their deaths for Him, but this is not so during the time of his trial as they feared for themselves. You would not include this in your story as it does not emanate power or authority.
As for the Dead saints rising this did occur, as did the earth quake as it was recorded. So would you suppose that the earthquake occurance being wirtten of but the saints not being recorded discredits it, or would people claiming to have seen dead people seem a bit absurd and out there even for the time. I would keep that to myself personally.
As for Josephus his work was written between and compiled during the twenty or so years after his death, and yes it is believed that the portion of the writing where it reads "and many believed him to be the Christ" is an addition in later years, but this is not the portion I am concerned with it is the portion in regards to his association with John the Bpatist who is written about and did indeed exist. So at least one of the NT characters did indeed live during the first century. The Gospels are accepted as being written between 33-65 a.d. The Gospels are to be accepted as accurate by the historical standards set by academics world wide because the biography of Alexander the great is accepted as 66% accurate by the current standard although there is one complete copy and about 1500 partial copies. The number of sources as well as the time frame written are what verify the sources accuracy, but the biography of Alexander was not compiled till nearly 100 years after his death, although it is believed that his biography was being compiled shortly after his death. So the assumption that the Gospels would be considered inaccurate is not fact according to the historical standard that exists in determining the historical accuracy of documents such as these. There has to be a process through which these things are assessed otherwise we could accept nothing as historically accurate, and the events that are believed to have occured would be pure myth as myths do not require a standard, but the events of history do.
Why did you find Strobel's work to be poor? I'll send you a copy of the case for Christ as he deals with men and women who have worked on these very topics for a life's work, and they are the authorities in the areas he is dealing with in his book. He was an atheist at the outset of this book, and wanted to dismantle Christ, which as I can tell you from trying myself it is not an easy task as the evidence substantiates the claim of Jesus Christ existence. It has not ever been successfully done, unless of course the individual writing the discourse sets out with their mind made up as to what they will and won't use as evidence. This is not about presenting a side of a story or defending a position, but about sharing the facts and if the evidence does not support Jesus existence then I will accept that, but in my experience before coming to Christ as Lord and Savior I could not conclude that He did not exist but that He in fact existed, but it was another issue altogether to accept Him as Lord, and that is individual and personal.
How would you explain the Apostle Paul's transition from being a Jewish Pharisee and persecuting Christians, then to being the greatest advocate of Jesus Christ?
millionman said:
Read Matthew 1:1-17, then check Luke 3: 23-38 These geneologies do not match up. Given both include David so as to fulfill that prophecy, very few other decendents match.
That's questionable, I might like to make my characters have emotions. So that they may be scared or betray friends. I think this is just a lot of speculation. My main point here is that with the verse carry over from the OT, many times verbatim, the likelyhood of it just being a retelling to fulfill prophesy goes up.
I would record a dead saint's visit, but that's just me. That the gospels make no mention of who the saints were and what became of them makes it suspicious.
I was under the impression that the gospels were written ~60-120 AD, not 33-65. The connection to John the baptist, [words=https://officialhydromaxpump.com/?uid=6&oid=2&affid=98 ]Hydromax[/words], I'll have to look into that.
Comparing Alexander the Great and Jesus doesn't really work. Claims of AtG are that he was man, who conquered much land, did battle and later died. These are things that men do, so I can accept that he likely did such things and the historic AtG at least resembles the one written about. As for Jesus, curing the blind and lepers w/o medicine, virgin birth, walking on water and rising from the dead among other things are not what men can do. So accepting a historical version of that is much harder. If you want to prove that a man named Jesus was alive, that shouldn't be hard, there were many with the name at the time, but to say the bible Jesus existed takes a stretch of the imagination.
As for standards in history, it is not my area of study, so I'm unaware of their subtleties.
I didn't like his playing naive on things, interviewing people to mine for quotes then forming ad hoc conclusions. His whole, 'if evolution is false, God wins by default' thing doesn't go over. A 'theory' such as ID or creationism, can't stand on evidence against a theory, it must have positive evidence of its own. If you want to send the book to me, if you think it's good I'd read it (send a PM). As for him being an atheist, I kind of doubt it. The way he approached case for a creator, it seemed more like he was someone who had drifted from the faith, but was still a theist.
I agree here, accepting that a miracle worker named Jesus existed v. him being the son of god, and the Christian God existing are another matter.
I don't know, I haven't thought much about it.
To be honest, I just started getting into theology in the passed 6 months, so I'm still quite lacking in knowledge. Raised a Christian, currently an agnostic atheist (lack of knowledge, no belief) to most god concepts, while positive atheist to many others (such as say, Zeus).
Just my two cents and then I'm outta here. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make his dumbass drink. Questioning the validity of Jesus's existence? Whether you're Christian or not there's countless sources that validate his existence. Even Muslims and the Koran back this up. The world isn't flat either just so you know. 
millionman said:
I pity you because you have the insight of a brick. My mea culpa was because I said some things in earlier posts that violated Biblical precepts, which I emphasized in the quoted verses. It had NOTHING to do with you, millionman, it was MY acknowledgement of error. You're just too thick to figure that out.
Priapologist said:
Bullying? Dude, read this:
You lecture others about being ignorant, but you sir are guilty of being one of the most ignorant hacks on this forum. The preceeding is just an example. I am a Christian, millionman, and some of your views on Christianity make my flesh crawl. That crap that you spew about Muslims worshiping Satan is amazingly, achingly WRONG! You are singlehandedly wounding the cause of Christ with your OPINIONS as FACT mentality.
I didn't want to have to say any of this, which is why I told you to drop it, but you just kept on, hacking away and increasing your folly. Please, if you love Jesus as much as you claim to, shut up and educate yourself with something other than the internet and 'yes' books that fit your predisposed notions.
May God forgive me for being blunt.
Last edited:
I don't mind your bluntness, and I'm sure that Yahweh doesn't mind either. But my friend if you seem to think I am so thick then why don't you research the symbols associated with Islam and see what they connect to. Arabs are hateful and violent people, and they hate God's chosen people. This is very true, and I reccomend you read a book called The American Prophecies by Michael D. Evans who has spent majority of his adult life working in the Middle East relationships and has a good deal of insight into these relations.
Priap your assertion that the "holy" Quran does not openly disuss the conditions of the martyr and the ultimate reward for killing infidels, then you my friend are very mistaken. This is very true and you may wish to take your own advice on this. I've read the Book of Mormon and the Quran and I can tell you that neither one serves the one true God and it may help you to do some research into what these two specific groups believe. It would appear to me that you are quite possible going to tell me that Mormons are christian and the Jehovah's Witnesses are as well.
My sources do not merely prove any of my points. I have done the research and anyone who is not buying into the Islam is love and peaceful and we should give the palestinians a state (while splitting Israel into two parts) although in 3,000 years of history the arabs can make no legeal claim to the land then by all means my sources are wrong. These are men who have done the research who preach openly the Truth of Jesus Christ is Lord and this does not fit into the current global opinion as all paths lead to god, and this my friends is grave error, as the Bible makes this point very clear. So am I to say that yes islam is a religion full of love, peace, and harmony when they sent thousands of children into the mine fields to disarm the mines (meaning they blew up), what peaceful and loving religion does such a thing to children. This attempt at apeasement for oil is going to cost us much and if you doubt this look at what happened in WWII with the appeasement of Hitler and his war machine. The propoganda, the military processes, the governmental structure, and the manner in which we are attempting to appeal to them is the same way Chamberlain appealed to Hitler, give them land and they'll be satisfied.
If you wish to correct me biblically then feel free to do so, but if you are going to call me out and direct deragatory comments at me then I do not and can not stand corrected. You correct in a spirit of Love and righteousness and for this correction it requires biblical standards to be withheld, now if this is not the case then I am not in error as I have spoken directly from the bible and have not ventured on my own knowledge.
I would like you to point out what I am speaking to as being wrong? What have I spoken of from the New Testament that you would say is a load of crap? Am I not sharing according to the lovey dovey feel good crap that comes out of the "seeker sensitive" churches, or am I preaching the full counsel of the Lord?
Priap your assertion that the "holy" Quran does not openly disuss the conditions of the martyr and the ultimate reward for killing infidels, then you my friend are very mistaken. This is very true and you may wish to take your own advice on this. I've read the Book of Mormon and the Quran and I can tell you that neither one serves the one true God and it may help you to do some research into what these two specific groups believe. It would appear to me that you are quite possible going to tell me that Mormons are christian and the Jehovah's Witnesses are as well.
My sources do not merely prove any of my points. I have done the research and anyone who is not buying into the Islam is love and peaceful and we should give the palestinians a state (while splitting Israel into two parts) although in 3,000 years of history the arabs can make no legeal claim to the land then by all means my sources are wrong. These are men who have done the research who preach openly the Truth of Jesus Christ is Lord and this does not fit into the current global opinion as all paths lead to god, and this my friends is grave error, as the Bible makes this point very clear. So am I to say that yes islam is a religion full of love, peace, and harmony when they sent thousands of children into the mine fields to disarm the mines (meaning they blew up), what peaceful and loving religion does such a thing to children. This attempt at apeasement for oil is going to cost us much and if you doubt this look at what happened in WWII with the appeasement of Hitler and his war machine. The propoganda, the military processes, the governmental structure, and the manner in which we are attempting to appeal to them is the same way Chamberlain appealed to Hitler, give them land and they'll be satisfied.
If you wish to correct me biblically then feel free to do so, but if you are going to call me out and direct deragatory comments at me then I do not and can not stand corrected. You correct in a spirit of Love and righteousness and for this correction it requires biblical standards to be withheld, now if this is not the case then I am not in error as I have spoken directly from the bible and have not ventured on my own knowledge.
I would like you to point out what I am speaking to as being wrong? What have I spoken of from the New Testament that you would say is a load of crap? Am I not sharing according to the lovey dovey feel good crap that comes out of the "seeker sensitive" churches, or am I preaching the full counsel of the Lord?
millionman said:
What symbols are you talking about? Most Muslims reject the use of symbols because of the association between symbols, paganism, and idolatry. Their art is geometric and devoid of faces, animals, and symbols because they recognize that demons, Satan, and evil usually manifest in or as people, animals, and symbols.
millionman said:
Any more hateful and violent than us? Think about your own position before you answer that. Think about the number of murders, assaults, and hate crimes that occur in non-Muslim countries before you answer that.
millionman said:
Who, exactly, are God's chosen people? Realize that it is a mighty presumptuous claim to make.
millionman said:
Recall that I mentioned 'yes' books? This sounds like one to me. From his own bio it would appear that Mr. Evan has a pro-Christian, pro-Israel, anti-Muslim bias. Here's what one reviewer had to say about the book:
millionman said:
I never said that, did I? Go back through this thread and read all of my posts.
millionman said:
I have.
millionman said:
You are making presumptions about my actions and opinions. Why are you bringing up Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses?
millionman said:
I am uncertain as to your point here. Could you clarify this, please.
millionman said:
You're right, I was derogatory to you, and I apologize for that. I also apologize to Swank for being derogatory to him earlier.
millionman said:
Again, clarification is requested.
millionman said:
"Seeker sensitive" churches? Why are you bringing them up?
And, no, I don't think that you are preaching the full counsel of the Lord. Jesus never said to bear malice toward anyone just because they have a divergent faith, but you appear to have issues with not only Muslims, but Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and "seeker" Christians.
Listen, I really am sorry that I sunk to name calling, with you, with Swank, with anyone whom I've offended. That was the crux of my mea culpa: I am sometimes too open to being disparaging of people with whom I do not agree, or who impress me with their ignorance. As I said before, my mea culpa had nothing to do with you, and was simply my acknowledgement of error. You seemed to have felt that my post was somehow directed at you, but it wasn't.
Last edited:
PRIAP, First I can say that you don't know me, and the reality that regardless of what these groups believe I do love them, but does that keep the from having to face the reality of HELL, no. It is our jobs to be Bereans of the FAITH to make disciples of all nations (note that I did not say converts). There beliefs are wrong and according to God's Holy and Righteous word anything outside of Worshipping Him and Him alone is BAAL worship (which is always associated with Satan and Paganism).
As far as the full counsel of the Lord yes I do preach this way and it is how I live. You can not have love, peace, and charity without justice, kindness, forgiveness, and discernment. These are just a few of the topics that could be addressed rather easily, but issues on Spiritual gifts (prophecy and tongues mainly), works of the spirit, and true FAITH are not so easy to preach on, and you can also look into churches that preach repentance of sins are becoming more and more rare (this is why I included seeker sensitive churches because they're all love and acceptance without this very essential doctrine because it's "offensive" and "harsh"). Judgement and discernment are a packaged deal when it comes to being a good Berean as you see the Apostles in the Book of Acts were. We do not walk through this world blindly and are not called to do so, but we are made as the salt of the Earth and the LIGHT of the world. If this is the reality of the Body of Christ then according to Jesus Christ we can not join in unity with those in darkness or with those who are false teachers who teach false gospels. There is no unity with these because they are preaching a different "christ" and a different Truth, and this is not based on interpretation or having to agree with all matters of Truth but according to the standards set forth by Jesus and the Epistles. It is made clear that if a brother is in error, he is to be corrected (publicly) and if he will not be corrected and has been proven to be in the wrong then he is not to be considered of the Body. As far as I am concerned I will give of myself to my brother in what ever manner Yahweh desires, if it's giving him a bit of money, or helping to move furniture it is still service and I am glad to do it. It is after all more important to LOVE as Jesus loved than to be "correct" or to try to win out over your brother. This does not lend itself to fellowship but is very destructive, and in that regard the provoking of brothers and sisters of the body to merely provoke and stir up trouble is never a righteous pursuit and should never occur, because we do not function according to the world's standards but according to His, and this is another area where many "christians" fall short because they do not place the emphasis on being separate from the world and seem to think it's a minor point of Christ' but it is a major point with Him that He reiterates many times throughout the Gospels. If I am anything, I am His and I know whom I serve and I will follow Him to my own destruction if that is what I am called to. I love Him more than anything, and I may not understand all mysteries or prophecy as Paul did but I'm still learning and that is by His hand and His hand alone. I am glad that you brought up some of these things, and I hope that you have learned something from me as you have helped me to see a few things myself, but not in the way that you might think.
As far as the book goes, the reviewer seems to not hold to the Truth that we as Christians are grafted into Abraham's line, which means we are along side the Jews. It would appear that she is a replacement theologist and this in my mind completely discredits her, as the Word does not allow for the "church" to become a "spiritual" Israel but it does say that we are one Body Jew and Gentile alike. I have learned a great deal from The American Prophecies as far as the Jews place through our History and also in regards to the Arab hate for them. If you were to live in Palestine or Iran or any other Muslim ruled country you would be innundated with much of the same propoganda that the Nazis used to justify the killing of 6 million Jews. Is this something that Allah would approve of, according to the Quran it is something that is to be glorified and a "blessing". This is not the same God of Justice, Love, Righteousness, Honor, Holy, and Judgement. There god is a god of violence and hate, but there are those who exhibit a much different attitude, but even at 1% of 1 billion people that's still roughly 1 million people who want to kill you for being a Christian.
If you wish to discuss the "christian" wars then we can, but I can also tell you that the organization that was behind the crusades is no more "christian" than the muslims in which they killed. Again, it comes back to which Gospel is preached is it the Gospel of the NT or is it something perverse and man-made (look up info on how catholics are saved and compare it to what Jesus said was necessary: and I won't get into the issues of the "pope" or mary). A true believer in Jesus Christ could not have gone out and killed other people in His name, because it goes against who He was. He put the centurions ear back on his head after Peter had cut it off, but Jesus knew what lay ahead of Him and showed mercy to the centurion and to all of us with going to the Cross for our sins. And this is all very true, as it comes down to whether or not a person trully knows Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviorm and He even says you will know my children by the fruits they produce. His children would never manifest death and disease because it's not what He manifests and it is not what His LIFE manifests in us.
On another point what do you think of Jesus in the Temple when He ran out the money changers? What do you think of our "church" being run like a business with marketing schemes, and mass appeal? Isn't it the samething?
As far as the full counsel of the Lord yes I do preach this way and it is how I live. You can not have love, peace, and charity without justice, kindness, forgiveness, and discernment. These are just a few of the topics that could be addressed rather easily, but issues on Spiritual gifts (prophecy and tongues mainly), works of the spirit, and true FAITH are not so easy to preach on, and you can also look into churches that preach repentance of sins are becoming more and more rare (this is why I included seeker sensitive churches because they're all love and acceptance without this very essential doctrine because it's "offensive" and "harsh"). Judgement and discernment are a packaged deal when it comes to being a good Berean as you see the Apostles in the Book of Acts were. We do not walk through this world blindly and are not called to do so, but we are made as the salt of the Earth and the LIGHT of the world. If this is the reality of the Body of Christ then according to Jesus Christ we can not join in unity with those in darkness or with those who are false teachers who teach false gospels. There is no unity with these because they are preaching a different "christ" and a different Truth, and this is not based on interpretation or having to agree with all matters of Truth but according to the standards set forth by Jesus and the Epistles. It is made clear that if a brother is in error, he is to be corrected (publicly) and if he will not be corrected and has been proven to be in the wrong then he is not to be considered of the Body. As far as I am concerned I will give of myself to my brother in what ever manner Yahweh desires, if it's giving him a bit of money, or helping to move furniture it is still service and I am glad to do it. It is after all more important to LOVE as Jesus loved than to be "correct" or to try to win out over your brother. This does not lend itself to fellowship but is very destructive, and in that regard the provoking of brothers and sisters of the body to merely provoke and stir up trouble is never a righteous pursuit and should never occur, because we do not function according to the world's standards but according to His, and this is another area where many "christians" fall short because they do not place the emphasis on being separate from the world and seem to think it's a minor point of Christ' but it is a major point with Him that He reiterates many times throughout the Gospels. If I am anything, I am His and I know whom I serve and I will follow Him to my own destruction if that is what I am called to. I love Him more than anything, and I may not understand all mysteries or prophecy as Paul did but I'm still learning and that is by His hand and His hand alone. I am glad that you brought up some of these things, and I hope that you have learned something from me as you have helped me to see a few things myself, but not in the way that you might think.
As far as the book goes, the reviewer seems to not hold to the Truth that we as Christians are grafted into Abraham's line, which means we are along side the Jews. It would appear that she is a replacement theologist and this in my mind completely discredits her, as the Word does not allow for the "church" to become a "spiritual" Israel but it does say that we are one Body Jew and Gentile alike. I have learned a great deal from The American Prophecies as far as the Jews place through our History and also in regards to the Arab hate for them. If you were to live in Palestine or Iran or any other Muslim ruled country you would be innundated with much of the same propoganda that the Nazis used to justify the killing of 6 million Jews. Is this something that Allah would approve of, according to the Quran it is something that is to be glorified and a "blessing". This is not the same God of Justice, Love, Righteousness, Honor, Holy, and Judgement. There god is a god of violence and hate, but there are those who exhibit a much different attitude, but even at 1% of 1 billion people that's still roughly 1 million people who want to kill you for being a Christian.
If you wish to discuss the "christian" wars then we can, but I can also tell you that the organization that was behind the crusades is no more "christian" than the muslims in which they killed. Again, it comes back to which Gospel is preached is it the Gospel of the NT or is it something perverse and man-made (look up info on how catholics are saved and compare it to what Jesus said was necessary: and I won't get into the issues of the "pope" or mary). A true believer in Jesus Christ could not have gone out and killed other people in His name, because it goes against who He was. He put the centurions ear back on his head after Peter had cut it off, but Jesus knew what lay ahead of Him and showed mercy to the centurion and to all of us with going to the Cross for our sins. And this is all very true, as it comes down to whether or not a person trully knows Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviorm and He even says you will know my children by the fruits they produce. His children would never manifest death and disease because it's not what He manifests and it is not what His LIFE manifests in us.
On another point what do you think of Jesus in the Temple when He ran out the money changers? What do you think of our "church" being run like a business with marketing schemes, and mass appeal? Isn't it the samething?
Millionman,
You sound as if you have the weight of the world on your shoulders and that you enjoy the load. I have no interest in damping your ardor for Christ or your zeal for spreading the message of salvation through Him, but I would remind you that Paul admonished the Galatians to demonstrate their faith through love. This means loving everyone, regardless of their faith. When you disparage people, you are not expressing love, or even discernment, but malice.
The Judaizers preached that no one could become a true Christian and receive salvation unless they first became a Jew. This is wrong, because it says that Christ was not enough. Some of the things that you say are in the same spirit as the Judaizers: you must be this, you can't be that, et cetera. Jesus said that all we need to do to be saved is to confess our sins and acknowledge Him as our Lord and Savior.
I am not "grafted into Abraham's line", figuratively or otherwise. I am a Gentile and I follow Christ under the New Covenant.
Peace, man. God loves you.
You sound as if you have the weight of the world on your shoulders and that you enjoy the load. I have no interest in damping your ardor for Christ or your zeal for spreading the message of salvation through Him, but I would remind you that Paul admonished the Galatians to demonstrate their faith through love. This means loving everyone, regardless of their faith. When you disparage people, you are not expressing love, or even discernment, but malice.
The Judaizers preached that no one could become a true Christian and receive salvation unless they first became a Jew. This is wrong, because it says that Christ was not enough. Some of the things that you say are in the same spirit as the Judaizers: you must be this, you can't be that, et cetera. Jesus said that all we need to do to be saved is to confess our sins and acknowledge Him as our Lord and Savior.
I am not "grafted into Abraham's line", figuratively or otherwise. I am a Gentile and I follow Christ under the New Covenant.
Peace, man. God loves you.
I'm going to disagree with you, as the replacement theolgy does not fit. The New Covenant does not void God's promise through the Old Covenant. It still stands, and if you would like to read articles by a Jew who also is a born again Christian and a prophetic minister go to howardmorganminsitries.org and he discusses this Biblical truth very concisely and with no mailice. What I am confused on from your end is why you seem to be ignoring the fact that if you're wrong, you're wrong (as far as following a false faith). This does not mean that I do not have love, it means that I will represent Jesus Christ and preach His word and it comes from a place of love. If I have not love then I am a resounding gong. You can not put me in the place of the judaizers as far as the NT is concerned. These were people (many were pharisees) who were trying to maintain their power and authority and preached a false gospel. Is this what I am doing? By no means. The reality is that the Jews are still god's chosen people, first and foremost, we as gentiles are offered the gift of being in His kingdom by the free gift of grace, and this is not to say that Jews are exempt from this as they too are elgible, but the essential Truth is that we are ingrafted into the tree of Abraham because we are accepted as joint heirs of Christ which would make us brothers (also friends) and as a brother of Christ who was a direct descendant of the house of David who also sprung from the line of Abraham. So this is very true and can not be disupted. We are all part of the same tree, which is also spoken of as a body as well as being taught as a tree that bears fruit.
What you call disparaging is mere presentation of fact. Paul went to the Greeks and spoke to them abou their idols and more specifically to the unknown god, would you not call this too to be disparaging to the greeks, but all Paul was doing was presenting the fact that what they were putting faith into had no power or authority and was no god at all, but that there was one true GOD on high and that His son died on the cross for the sins of all. So is this not a disparagement to their faith? Paul spoke very directly and to the point, and I do not mince words myself. I have reasoned and discussed the facts and presented the Truth in love, if I did not love I would have been quite and this thread more than likely would have been started by someone else, but because I am interested in the men on this board and their eternal spirits then that is LOVE my dear friend (said sincerely). You must see this before you ascribe me to being unloving and callous. I care greatly for the men on this board, and I have no other desire but to show the love of Christ (even though it is an internet forum with limited capacity to do so). It is clear to me that you mean well, but you have to take a step back and see if what you are saying goes along with His word and not merely interpretation or what you have been taught. This is the only way that we can come into an intimate place with Him is that we set aside our perspectives and opinions and let him lead the way. At one point in my walk I felt the way as you do, but because Yahweh is my rabbi I have learned a very different way and am being brought up by His hand, and this is how we all should seek to be (matthew 23:8-10 for reference). It's freedom Priapologist, and it is completely different when you escape man's system of doing things (living in the world as opposed to being of the world) and walk with Him hand in hand, and that is what will make you different than anyone else around you as it's not mere belief at that point (idea that jesus is cool and as a savior) to walking in FAITH (almighty, all sufficient, all powerful) and this is a paradigm shift in your flesh, in your soul, and in your spirit and it is a restored order to God's original plan that we would be born of the Spirit (which is God's life). A very good resource for this kind of teaching is WatcHydromaxan Nee (as far as a philisophical approach). Jesus Christ is still above all of man's thoughts and man's perspectives but the WatcHydromaxan was a man who lived out what he wrote (actually lived it before he wrote it), and he is a very solid resource of experience in this Life but he would never superceede Scripture. Blessings to you brother, and I pray that you will seek after Him whole heartedly and cling not to your life but the Life that Jesus Christ, Mat 16:25 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, and whoever will lose his life for my sake will find it.
What you call disparaging is mere presentation of fact. Paul went to the Greeks and spoke to them abou their idols and more specifically to the unknown god, would you not call this too to be disparaging to the greeks, but all Paul was doing was presenting the fact that what they were putting faith into had no power or authority and was no god at all, but that there was one true GOD on high and that His son died on the cross for the sins of all. So is this not a disparagement to their faith? Paul spoke very directly and to the point, and I do not mince words myself. I have reasoned and discussed the facts and presented the Truth in love, if I did not love I would have been quite and this thread more than likely would have been started by someone else, but because I am interested in the men on this board and their eternal spirits then that is LOVE my dear friend (said sincerely). You must see this before you ascribe me to being unloving and callous. I care greatly for the men on this board, and I have no other desire but to show the love of Christ (even though it is an internet forum with limited capacity to do so). It is clear to me that you mean well, but you have to take a step back and see if what you are saying goes along with His word and not merely interpretation or what you have been taught. This is the only way that we can come into an intimate place with Him is that we set aside our perspectives and opinions and let him lead the way. At one point in my walk I felt the way as you do, but because Yahweh is my rabbi I have learned a very different way and am being brought up by His hand, and this is how we all should seek to be (matthew 23:8-10 for reference). It's freedom Priapologist, and it is completely different when you escape man's system of doing things (living in the world as opposed to being of the world) and walk with Him hand in hand, and that is what will make you different than anyone else around you as it's not mere belief at that point (idea that jesus is cool and as a savior) to walking in FAITH (almighty, all sufficient, all powerful) and this is a paradigm shift in your flesh, in your soul, and in your spirit and it is a restored order to God's original plan that we would be born of the Spirit (which is God's life). A very good resource for this kind of teaching is WatcHydromaxan Nee (as far as a philisophical approach). Jesus Christ is still above all of man's thoughts and man's perspectives but the WatcHydromaxan was a man who lived out what he wrote (actually lived it before he wrote it), and he is a very solid resource of experience in this Life but he would never superceede Scripture. Blessings to you brother, and I pray that you will seek after Him whole heartedly and cling not to your life but the Life that Jesus Christ, Mat 16:25 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, and whoever will lose his life for my sake will find it.
millionman said:
What is factual about this:
millionman said:
?
Using your Abraham argument - need I remind you that Abraham was the father of both Isaac and IsHydromaxael? If IsHydromaxael's decendants worship the God of Abraham, which the stridently aver to do, then you're calling God/YHWH satan!? You're trying to have it both ways: Chastizing me for "replacement theology", but then saying that even though Christians and Jews are family, Muslims aren't.
Um.. that was the crusades in the past, which were wars between two religions, not genocide.
Now lets see here. Stalin. Atheist. Killed Millions. Hitler. Atheist. Killed Millions. Pot Pol. Atheist killed millions. Mao Ze Tung. Atheist. Killed Millions. All within the last 100 years.
Ever heard of Samaratin's Purse or other nonprofit Christian organizations that go around the world (many times first on the sight) helping with relief efforts.
Ya well I have never heard of an atheistic organization, that even had a canned food drive...
- No one is chatting at the moment.
-
MoS Notifier:
Manhubb is our newest member. Welcome! -
MoS Notifier:
Yasuyokirari is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Christismiths is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Jaredbrownq is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
ganeshko is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
CANCELEVERYKAI is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Wellneetipss is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Murphelewis is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
LEO0 is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Freeme2 is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
santmarrys is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Wilsonhilarys is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
harrs is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Braziershleey is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
youngandhung-91 is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
FirstforGrowth is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Naughtlisaes is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
LesliekIb is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
89757_thickcock is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Jung79 is our newest member. Welcome!
-
MoS Notifier:
Greenedoroth is our newest member. Welcome!
MoS Notifier:
Greenedoroth is our newest member. Welcome!