- This topic has 259 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Yeah, no “pity pot” here. Its not my fault the OT is full of brutality and Jesus never said it was wrong.
Quote (Colter @ April 20 2008,20:48) Quote (kejonn @ April 21 2008,10:53) Yeah, no “pity pot” here. Its not my fault the OT is full of brutality and Jesus never said it was wrong. Quote Its not my fault the OT is full of brutality and Jesus never said it was wrong. Jesus never said that the OT was “right” either. It was not his mission to destroy the faith of the Jews but rather give them a better one.
Was Yahweh the father he claimed? You say Jesus is God, and the OT says Yahweh is God so…Jesus was perfectly accepting of the OT.Quote His life, his teachings, his religious practice should be enough to tell you that he did not approve of the dim view of the Father in the OT.
Huh? You say Jesus is God. If Yahweh is God and Jesus is God, Jesus was represented as the OT God.Quote In the UR we have the private conversation with one of his apostles addressing the matter of the scriptures.
No, you have additions to the bible by creative men who wanted to try to fill in gaps with their own beliefs.**SNIP**
Quote (Cato @ Feb. 12 2008,02:50) Premise: Most Christians do not believe in or are silent on pre-existence of human souls. Souls come about at conception or sometime after this, but before actual birth. Then during it's life it is given an opportunity to know and believe in Jesus Christ as son of God, and based on this belief and perhaps a lesser extent, the acts of faith it performs because of this knowledge, then goes on upon it's death to be blessed with eternal life when its body is ressurected, or faces eternal damnation (or destruction based on your interpretation of scripture). Now there are various nuances on this with Catholics hedging their bets with purgatory and limbo and many evangelicals pushing for a tighter interpretation that we must be “born again” to achieve this salvation. My reaction to this is that not only is it illogical, it denies the laws of the universe, is filled with basic inequalities, and makes little sense if the creator is a God of love.
First, it to me, violates law, laws that God created and set in motion. Nothing in the universe goes from infinite to finite or from finite to infinite. How then can one finite existence then lead to an infinite, eternal, reward or punishment?
Second, if the stakes are so incredibly high for our one life, then God certainly loves some of us much more then others. One is born to loving Christian parents who teach them, love and nurture them, and surround them with others who believe likewise and encourage and help them stay on path. Another is born in a devout Muslim family and lives the same, but for his faith. Another is born unto a child soldier in Africa, is taught to kill from an early age and in turn is killed as a young man. While all may have an opportunity for salvation, don't try and tell me the chances are the same. Why would the odds be so stacked against some. If we are all loved and we all have just one life then it is clearly unfair.
Third, if a loving God created us and loved us would he throw us into a life that in essence becomes a test that ultimately condemns the vast majority of souls? Knowing that God is omniscient would he create a system that would lead to this? I feel that God blessed us with the capacity to be parents so we could understand at some basic level what God feels about us. Can any of us who are parents comtemplate eternally destroying or damning our own children. Punish them when unruly sure, but to punish or destroy them eternally, I don't think so. If that is human love just think how much greater is divine love.
Why would God create us in the first place? To set up a litmus test of faith to separate good and bad, weak and strong? Or perhaps he wanted children he could see grow and mature and learn to love him and each other, knowing that these children are individuals with varying strengths and weaknesses who will mature at different rates. Do we hold a 5 year old to the same standards as an older child or an adult? I can't help but think that an omnipotent loving God who would bother creating mankind would have a better system for dispensing of our souls then what most of us were taught in common Christian theology.
Amen, brother!When I was a devout Christian, I would have never (ever) listened to your message. It goes against what we are taught in the bible, after all.
Now the message is clear, easily understood and I no longer fear it.
Most cannot deny what you say, they can only muster-up excuses for what the bible says.
Quote (Colter @ April 21 2008,06:30) Quote Was Yahweh the father he claimed? You say Jesus is God, and the OT says Yahweh is God so…Jesus was perfectly accepting of the OT. Kevin, at times your bias realy prevents you from using the bright mind that you have.
Your logic here is: religious writings have man creating God in mans own image, yet should the spirit incarnate as a man to reveal God, you have to hold him accountable for the erronious concepts conceived in mens mind. That dog won't hunt!!!
If someone wrote a book about you and it was false, would you support it and tell everyone it was valid? Jesus said the Law was still valid, and the Law is otherwise known as the Torah, or the Pentateuch. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy.
So the dog is still very much in the hunt.
The difference is that you choose to ignore that Jesus said NOTHING against the view of Yahweh in the OT.
Quote Quote No, you have additions to the bible by creative men who wanted to try to fill in gaps with their own beliefs. So, if the UB is not a revelation you still would make the same argument about any future revelation “oh, your just trying to fix the Bible, it's all a conspiracy…..but I still believe in God, but I will judge all revelation based on the Bible….which I believe is flawed anyway……All scientist must be part of a conspiracy to “fill in the gaps” of the old false scientific teachings. So no new science can be right because they are all part of the old scientific thinking.
Future revelations should be just that: things dealing with the time they were written and about the future. It should not be about adding to things that happened thousands of years ago. That's call redaction or revision.Quote I know your capable of better thinking, that's why I say you still enjoy getting mileage out of “they tricked me my whole life, boo-hoo”. Colter
No “boo hoo”. Nobody tricked me, I failed to investigate. Most Christians stay away from the bloody passages in the bible so they can hold on to the idea that God is love. I did as well. When I decided to study more of the OT, what I began to discover could no longer be avoided.Quote (Colter @ April 21 2008,09:46) Quote If someone wrote a book about you and it was false, would you support it and tell everyone it was valid? Jesus said the Law was still valid, and the Law is otherwise known as the Torah, or the Pentateuch. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. So the dog is still very much in the hunt.
The difference is that you choose to ignore that Jesus said NOTHING against the view of Yahweh in the OT.
OH really?
* “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”…so much for Leviticus!
Sorry, but that passage from John 8 is not found in the earliest manuscripts, so it was likely added by a revisionist.Quote * Lest you be born agian (leave your old religious ideas and start over) you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven ( those who believe in the fatherhood of God, of ALL mankind, that all men are brothers and sisters of the same God) Israel is just a city like any other city.
Mat 19:16 And behold, a man came up to him, saying, “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?”
Mat 19:17 And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.”Quote * Resist not evil but love your enimies…so much for an eye for an eye!
That one is good. But again, I ask you to show me where he ever showed love towards his enemies. Is it “do as I say, not as I do”?Quote * “When Gods will is your law then you are hardly in the kingdom”. …so much for the 613 laws of Judaism.
Huh? He said that not a single bit of the Law would pass until heaven and earth passed. Has that happened?Quote * “Happy are the poor in spirit”…so much for a special class of “chosen people”.
Pro 16:19 It is better to be of a lowly spirit with the poor than to divide the spoil with the proud.Nothing new there.
Quote * “Go and sin no more”…so much for inherited sin and the so called fall of man.
Tell that to Paul.Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned–
Quote * “My kingdom is not of this world”….so much for the house of David!
And? It was obvious he would not have a kingdom in this world, so it is quite easy to make this statement. He was about to be put to death so he knew he wouldn't have a kingdom here.Quote * “The kingdom of heaven is within you”….so much for church authority!
Eze 36:27 “I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.Quote * “He who does the will of God shall be saved”…..so much for church authority.
Yes, I agree but the same idea is taught in the OT. Except the OT tries to go into detail about what the will of Yahweh is through the many mitzvot. How does one know the will of Yahweh in every day life in Christianity?Quote * And finally Jesus taught that salvation is by grace, it's not an accomplishment and has nothing to do with the ritual sacrifice of small animals.
Only according to GoJ. According to the synoptics, eternal life comes from keeping the commandments. So which one is correct, Matthew through Luke, or the easier version of believing in Jesus? Both were said by the same man according to the NT.Quote To judge history or the religious practice of people who lived 3,000 years ago against this age one will always come up short. Kevin, in another three thousand years if people where to judge your current thinking and behavior against theirs you will look like Leviticus to them.
Rightly so. That just means I am human and the bible was written by humans. It is not the infallible word of God.Quote Jesus didn't stand in judgment of Judaism's evolution, he was understandingly sympethetic with them. He gave his life to set them free from the bondage of primitive ritual.
And yet by not speaking out against the OT, he was compliant with it. What he seemed to speak out against was the oral Torah, which eventually became the Talmud. He spoke out against the actions and beliefs of the Pharisees and Sadducees, but never against the set of books they followed. So he was not delivering them from the Tanach, but from their own set of ways of interpeting the Law.Quote Quote Future revelations should be just that: things dealing with the time they were written and about the future. It should not be about adding to things that happened thousands of years ago. That's call redaction or revision. Again, you can complain to God latter about why, when and how he chooses to do revelations.
Please Colter. It is not evolutionary to revise the bible like the UB does. It is not revelation either. It is just an attempt to fill in the gaps of what isn't there with speculation.Look at Islam and B'hai and the Book
of Mormon. At least they tried to reveal something newer. The UB just tries to explain the old so it is really not a revelation but a bunch of oddly written apologetics that uses a truckload of silence from the bible. In that esence it is not even apologetics but is a blatant attempt to add onto what men wrote thousands of years ago.Quote Quote No “boo hoo”. Nobody tricked me, I failed to investigate. Most Christians stay away from the bloody passages in the bible so they can hold on to the idea that God is love. I did as well. When I decided to study more of the OT, what I began to discover could no longer be avoided. The Hebrew priest destroyed their secular history, wrote a series of books for their Jewish audience while they were captive in Babylon. It is after all “The OLD Testament”.
Colter
I don't disagree. Its a shame that Jesus did not speak against such revisionism. This either means Jesus agreed with it, or didn't care.Quote (Colter @ April 21 2008,12:26) Quote That one is good. But again, I ask you to show me where he ever showed love towards his enemies. Is it “do as I say, not as I do”? Kevin, honestly, what is your resentment for Jesus? The basless things you say at times lead me to wounder if you have read the New testiment? Or do you only see what you want to see in your out of context battle against the character of this man?
I have no resentment for Jesus. After all, it will never be known for sure if the NT is truly about the man who was named Jesus or if the stories told were legends that never really fit the man's life. So I can't have anything against someone who cannot truly be known.But, if Jesus was indeed the person spoken of in the NT, I still would like to know how he can be the same God of the OT, yet be so diametrically opposed to that God.
And where did this “satan” character come from? You won't find him in the OT. Where are the demon possessions in the OT?
You yourself have said that the OT should be “jettisoned” but you can't truly do that when you read enough in the NT to know that Jesus accepted the OT as valid. If Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and you say he is God, that means he should have the same characteristics as Yahweh. Yet we know he does not. Care to explain this?
Quote Jesus never commited any violence towards anyone and taught people to turn the other cheak towards their enimies. He never taught his apostles or anyone else to fight the enimies of the gospel. Even when the Roman guards came to arrest him Jesus told them not to resist. Throughout the cruelest of treatment Jesus never defended himself.
But wasn't that the plan? Didn't he say it was his father's will that this should happen? And didn't he know he was going to only be dead for 3 days and then return to heaven and all of its glory? So why in the world should he resist? If I knew all of this without a doubt, I wouldn't resist either.Quote And lastly, to destroy this BS statment you make about “do as I say not as I do”, as Jesus hung there nailed to a tree for the crime of teaching peace and love he asked his Father to forgive those who mistreeted him, “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do”.
I knew that was coming. In any case, I'm still waiting for you to show me how he loved his enemies. Show me where he treated Pharisees with kindness. Its quite easy to say “love your enemies” but another to actually carry it out.Not only that, think about “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do”. Well, wasn't what they were doing all according to the plan? Isn't this remiscient of how Yahweh manipulated Pharaoh so that he could bring the various plagues to show him who was the real boss? All the people were doing, according to the NT, was being pawns in the grater scheme of Yahweh's — and Jesus' –plan.
Quote You really have a lot gaul to make these accusations that you do!
See above. Can you deny that any of this is false?Quote Quote Huh? He said that not a single bit of the Law would pass until heaven and earth passed. Has that happened? We don't follow the law anymore, did you not notice that
Why not? For one thing, the Law was for the Jews, so in reality, Jesus was saying their covenant was still in effect. His “new covenant” was with his followers, and not the Jews. Moses brought the covenant before a nation, Jesus brought his covenant before a handful of people. To be honest, without Paul, you'd be on the outside looking in because Jesus' covenant was not with Gentiles, but Jews.Quote Quote And? It was obvious he would not have a kingdom in this world, so it is quite easy to make this statement. He was about to be put to death so he knew he wouldn't have a kingdom here. Jesus repeatedly throughout his teachings referred to the “kingdom of heaven” as a present tense reality. Please see New Testament
Yes, but don't forget he was supposed to be the Jewish messiah. That did not work out.Quote Quote How does one know the will of Yahweh in every day life in Christianity? Ask him, he is in you.
How is that any different than what I have been studying about looking to God for inspiration to carry out good thoughts, words and deeds?Quote Quote Please Colter. It is not evolutionary to revise the bible like the UB does. It is not revelation either. It is just an attempt to fill in the gaps of what isn't there with speculation. You've not read it so your opinion is silly.
“Christianity has indeed done a great service for this world, but what is now most needed is Jesus. The world needs to see Jesus living again on earth in the experience of spirit-born mortals who effectively reveal the Master to all men.[/B] It is futile to talk about a revival of primitive Christianity; you must go forward from where you find yourselves. Modern culture must become spiritually baptized with a new revelation of Jesus' life and illuminated with a new understanding of his gospel of eternal salvation. And when Jesus becomes thus lifted up, he will draw all men to himself. Jesus' disciples should
be more than conquerors, even overflowing sources of inspiration and enhanced living to all men. Religion is only an exalted humanism until it is made divine by the discovery of the reality of the presence of God in personal experience.”
That's not revelation, that's just common sense that too many miss out on because they are stuck in trying to make a 1st century Jewish heresy fit a 21st century world.Quote (Colter @ April 21 2008,16:05) KJ, This argument about Jesus not loving the Jewsih authorities is looking more and more like a straw man. You say that you don't resent Jesus but spend a lot of efforet trying to make him look bad.
But again, can we truly know Jesus through the bible? It doesn't seem to be enough for you, so you tack the UB view of Jesus on as well. So your view of Jesus doesn't match the view of Jesus brought on by the bible.Quote The Pharaseeis or their spies followed Jesus around and were present on a number of occasions. Some were saved as they tried to intrap him in theological nonsence yet his gental answers made converts of them as well.
Only one for sure: Nicodemus. Any others would be speculation. And please refrain from ten more paragraphs from the UB please
.Quote The enemies of Christ were determined to put an end to his teaching, he afforded them every opertunity to repent and except him but they would not have it! And look at yourself Kevin, now you have joined them in their cause! It's just sickening to see this happen to someone!
I will ask you point blank: is Jesus Yahweh, or part of Yahweh in a triune god?Quote Quote But wasn't that the plan? Didn't he say it was his father's will that this should happen? And didn't he know he was going to only be dead for 3 days and then return to heaven and all of its glory? So why in the world should he resist? If I knew all of this without a doubt, I wouldn't resist either. He did it for you Kevin
You didn't get it. If we are to believe the bible, this was no true sacrifice. A true sacrifice would be to end his life for all time. What kind of sacrifice is to return to heaven for eternity and be Yahweh's second in command? With angels at his beck and call? Does his sacrifice mean more than millions of men and woman who have given their life for a cause? We know they are dead.Were any of the animals killed as sacrifices then resurrected? If not, then how can Jesus be a true sacrifice? It sounds more like an inconvenience.
Quote Quote Why not? For one thing, the Law was for the Jews, so in reality, Jesus was saying their covenant was still in effect. His “new covenant” was with his followers, and not the Jews. Moses brought the covenant before a nation, Jesus brought his covenant before a handful of people. To be honest, without Paul, you'd be on the outside looking in because Jesus' covenant was not with Gentiles, but Jews. Jesus instructed his apostles to take the gospel to ALL of the world. That had nothing to do with Pauls Pagan transformation of the message into Christianity.
Notice that they didn't. The apostles continued to spread the word to the Jewish population. Why is that? Why is it that Paul was the one who went to the Gentiles?Quote Quote Yes, but don't forget he was supposed to be the Jewish messiah. That did not work out. Jesus didn't teach that he was the Messiah, he wasn't the Messiah, the Messiah was a misconception.
Joh 4:25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ). When he comes, he will tell us all things.”
Joh 4:26 Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am he.”Quote Quote How is that any different than what I have been studying about looking to God for inspiration to carry out good thoughts, words and deeds? It's not different, you can find him that way as he is in you and trying to contact you in your higher conscience.
Trashing Jesus is not “good thought's words or deeds”.
The God you look for in inspiration is the one that you are fighting.
That is your opinion. Should we dump the OT altogether, and remove all OT references from the NT? If not, you have no basis for this statement.But if Jesus=Yahweh, what then?
Quote Quote That's not revelation, that's just common sense that too many miss out on because they are stuck in trying to make a 1st century Jewish heresy fit a 21st century world. If the religion is predominately “man made” then how could it be heresy?
Colter
Heresy is simply an unsupported offshoot of any religion. Christianity started out as just another Jewish sect, seen as a heresy by the mainstream Jews.Quote (Colter @ April 22 2008,06:58) Quote The Pharaseeis or their spies followed Jesus around and were present on a number of occasions. Some were saved as they tried to intrap him in theological nonsence yet his gental answers made converts of them as well. Only one for sure: Nicodemus. Any others would be speculation. And please refrain from ten more paragraphs from the UB please
You've accused the Son of God of being a hypocrite, “do as I say not as I do”, one of several false accusations that you have made against him.
I will spare you the answers to your questions from the UB as you aren't really interested in answers but rather are still getting mileage and attention out of being a victim.
Colter, answers from the UB are not commentary on the bible but additions that are not found in the bible. So they can't be viewed as realistic answers. You do well not to answer using the UB.Give me my answer using the bible.
Quote Quote I will ask you point blank: is Jesus Yahweh, or part of Yahweh in a triune god? No! Yahweh is a purely evolutionary conception of God which developed over a long period of time and inclusive of other concepts. It is a concept that drew from a pantheistic linage and different regions among the Semitic peoples, Ur, Kish, Palestine, Egypt etc.
Then why did Jesus accept him as his father?Mat 22:32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.”
The only way the Israelites knew the God of Abraham was via the OT.
Quote Yahweh was the volcano God of Mount Sinai which was still erupting up until the times of exodus. The term stayed with the Israelite although their concept of the one God continued to be refined. The son of God concept has been revealed but long lost prior to the life of Jesus.
Quote You didn't get it. If we are to believe the bible, this was no true sacrifice. A true sacrifice would be to end his life for all time. What kind of sacrifice is to return to heaven for eternity and be Yahweh's second in command? With angels at his beck and call? Does his sacrifice mean more than millions of men and woman who have given their life for a cause? We know they are dead. Were any of the animals killed as sacrifices then resurrected? If not, then how can Jesus be a true sacrifice? It sounds more like an inconvenience.
The sacrificial system was purely evolutionary
Jesus didn't teach human sacrifice nor did he practice animal sacrifice.
The cross was a “shared human experience”. It was an act of love for the creator to share the life of his creation. Deity becoming human and experiencing all that we are asked to do even death!
Did he truly experience death, according to the bible. We are assured of death. We are promised an afterlife through certain religious texts, but that is not a promise that can be validated. So did he truly experience the same death we are certain to experience?Quote It is the requirement of ALL creator sons to incarnate 7 times as their various created orders. The last and final is as a babe of the realm (a human, the least and last on the chain). Once this is accomplished they are given unquestioned authority. Jesus now has that, he is Christ Michael. To get to the Father you must pass through him. He is now to all intents and purposes OUR GOD.
No comment .Quote Quote Joh 4:25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ). When he comes, he will tell us all things.”
Joh 4:26 Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am he.”The concept of the Jewish Messiah was flawed, while it was based on the coming of the Son it became so distorted that it hardly represented what Jesus actually was. In that age there were multiple concepts of the coming Messiah. They never conceived of a person both human and Divine.
So you say. Yet how can you know the kind of Messiah this woman was speaking of? All we have for sure is the OT. Base your view on that.Quote If someone tells you all kinds of things about me, but then when you finally meet me I'm not what you expected, is that my fault?
Then he should have been more clear. He could have said “Your scriptures are wrong. This is how I am supposed to be.” But what did he say?Joh 5:39 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me
Quote Quote Notice that they didn't. The apostles continued to spread the word to the Jewish population. Why is that? Why is it that Paul was the one who went to the Gentiles? I know differenly but will spare you the anxiety of having to read the UB.
Then you don't “know”, you just depend on an alternate text to supply the answer using the silence of the bible. I could do the same as the UB: its called speculation.Quote Quote That is your opinion. Should we dump the OT altogether, and remove all OT references from the NT? If not, you have no basis for this statement. But if Jesus=Yahweh, what then?
Just take what you think is spiritualy true based on your experience with the God within your heart and leave the rest.
There are many good insitghts into God in the OT. I have no problem ignoring the primitive ones.
How do you know which passages are valid? “A little leaven leavens the whole lump”Quote Quote Heresy is simply an unsupported offshoot of any religion. Christianity started out as just another Jewish sect, seen as a heresy by the mainstream Jews. I agree, herecy is strickly man made.
Colter
We're getting closer with each response.I think I know why you like the UB: it helps you keep your belief in Jesus alive. It adds much to his life story that enables you to keep believing. If you just depended on the bible, you'd likely be where I am right now. Am I close to being correct in this evaluation?
Quote (Colter @ April 22 2008,11:40) Quote Then why did Jesus accept him as his father? Mat 22:32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.”
The only way the Israelites knew the God of Abraham was via the OT.
Oh, nice murder of context!
29Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 31But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 32'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'[a]? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.”
The Father is the God of the OT, that does not mean that OT writers or thinkers viewed him accuratly. None of us fully know him, but the life of Jesus made him more clear.
No murder of context. In fact, you just proved my very point by including this phrase: “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God”. What scriptures, Colter? Open up your bible, you'll find out what scriptures. Except they weren't in English. So Jesus was indeed supporting the validity, in his mind, of the OT!Quote Quote Did he truly experience death, according to the bible. We are assured of death. We are promised an afterlife through certain religious texts, but that is not a promise that can be validated. So did he truly experience the same death we are certain to experience? Well, get your neighbor to nail you to a tree and let you hang there until your heart stops beating. After you “may have died”, have him take down your possibly dead body and stick a knife in your side so that blood runs out all over the place.
If your not dead then you win the argument.
I think you know exactly what I mean. Jesus rose a few days later, and returned to the glory of heaven if we are to believe the bible. So, I repeat, how does three days of death compare to an eternity in heaven? Its not even a fleabite on the hindquarters of an elephant. It certainly obliterates the value of the sacrifice because billions have died throughout the earth's history, and they are still dead today.Quote Quote So you say. Yet how can you know the kind of Messiah this woman was speaking of? All we have for sure is the OT. Base your view on that. There were then and are now differing schools of thought within Judaism about the Messiah. The Pharisees, that Seduces and the Scribes all had theories. One thing is for curtain, there was heightened expectation of the coming son in those times.
Yes, but a Davidic son. All of them were looking for a deliverer of Davidic proportions, one who would physically conquer while on earth. None of them were looking for a spiritual savior.Quote Quote Then he should have been more clear. He could have said “Your scriptures are wrong. This is how I am supposed to be.” But what did he say? Joh 5:39 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me
I can see what he's talking about in the scriptures, but your crusade to point out all things negative prevent you from accentuating the positive.
Try me. This is typically a statement made by someone who doesn't really have an answer so they skirt the issue by saying “you won't listen anyway”.Quote Quote I think I know why you like the UB: it helps you keep your belief in Jesus alive. It adds much to his life story that enables you to keep believing. If you just depended on the bible, you'd likely be where I am right now. Am I close to being correct in this evaluation? In general, yes, that's accurate.
My life experience may be somewhat different then yours, I grew up in a moderate Methodist church. They didn't spend a lot of time talking about the Bible being the word of God. In fact my Dad is a UB reader from the 60's and has been going to that church for many years. He just ignores the nonsense but enjoys the fellowship and spiritual teachings that he agrees with.
As a teenager I hated going to Sunday school! I would get up Sunday morning, take some bong hits and go with them (reluctantly). I've always believed in God and I liked Jesus even better, perhaps that was the spirit of truth trying to work with me.
23 years ago on the 28th of this month I had my Damascus road moment of truth. So I became interested more in religion. I read the UB cover to cover (an accomplishment in itself). I've read the Bible as well. Frankly I was horrified by the OT and disappointed by how messed up the NT is, but I never have thought that the Bible was the word of God.
I should also point out that my friends in my spiritual life have a very vibrant and real relationship with God QUITE APART from Christianity or any organized religion.
So what's your beef with me?Quote It's not accurate to say that the UB fills in gaps left in the Bible. It would, however, be accurate to say that the UB illuminates the events that inspired elements of the Bible
C'mon Colter, the UB takes way too many liberties and inserts all sorts of notions that have zero biblical foundation. That is one of several reasons I cannot take it seriously. Had it been another religious text unrelated to the bible, that would be one thing, but it uses the bible as a base and then adds in many other things.**SNIP**
You just couldn't resist tossing ou
t several UB passages, could you.To put the death of Jesus in perspective as to a “sacrifice”…
(1) Jesus dead for 3 days
(2) 1975 years since Jesus' death and resurrection (1975 years back in heaven and alive)
(3) 3 / (1975)(365) * 100% = 0.00042%
(4) Average lifespan of humans = 76 years
(5) (76)(365)(.0000042) = 0.117 days = 2.8 hoursSo Jesus being dead for 3 days is like us being dead for 2.8 hours of our life. Traumatic, but if we are revived like Jesus, hallelujah!
Quote (kejonn @ April 23 2008,13:41) To put the death of Jesus in perspective as to a “sacrifice”… (1) Jesus dead for 3 days
(2) 1975 years since Jesus' death and resurrection (1975 years back in heaven and alive)
(3) 3 / (1975)(365) * 100% = 0.00042%
(4) Average lifespan of humans = 76 years
(5) (76)(365)(.0000042) = 0.117 days = 2.8 hoursSo Jesus being dead for 3 days is like us being dead for 2.8 hours of our life. Traumatic, but if we are revived like Jesus, hallelujah!
Just a tad lost?can we compare that to Jonas in the whale?
Quote (charity @ April 22 2008,20:58) Quote (kejonn @ April 23 2008,13:41) To put the death of Jesus in perspective as to a “sacrifice”… (1) Jesus dead for 3 days
(2) 1975 years since Jesus' death and resurrection (1975 years back in heaven and alive)
(3) 3 / (1975)(365) * 100% = 0.00042%
(4) Average lifespan of humans = 76 years
(5) (76)(365)(.0000042) = 0.117 days = 2.8 hoursSo Jesus being dead for 3 days is like us being dead for 2.8 hours of our life. Traumatic, but if we are revived like Jesus, hallelujah!
Just a tad lost?can we compare that to Jonas in the whale?
No because Jonah was alive the whole time.Quote (kejonn @ April 23 2008,14:15) Quote (charity @ April 22 2008,20:58) Quote (kejonn @ April 23 2008,13:41) To put the death of Jesus in perspective as to a “sacrifice”… (1) Jesus dead for 3 days
(2) 1975 years since Jesus' death and resurrection (1975 years back in heaven and alive)
(3) 3 / (1975)(365) * 100% = 0.00042%
(4) Average lifespan of humans = 76 years
(5) (76)(365)(.0000042) = 0.117 days = 2.8 hoursSo Jesus being dead for 3 days is like us being dead for 2.8 hours of our life. Traumatic, but if we are revived like Jesus, hallelujah!
Just a tad lost?can we compare that to Jonas in the whale?
No because Jonah was alive the whole time. yep
Jonah crossed the bridge into the new Land of exceeding enlightening Logic, so appealing to a city of Men they change their thinking and resolve past down inherited thinkingAnd perhaps is our enlightment, to his likened to Jesus, and any that follow?
charity
HI WJ,
You said in another thread“Do you have any Greek or Hebrew language degrees or theological degrees? If not, what makes you so prideful that you can justify your opposition against those who have spent their lives studying Hebrew and Greek and totally disagree with you and your view? Such arrogance.”
Do you think that the worldly university study of theology is a prerequisite for knowing God?
Seems for most it drives them further away.Sure, I guess if you want to be technical, men did put pen to paper (or papyrus, as it was back then), but the message of God was definitely preserved from the mouth of the prophets to the paper.
Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 21 2009,12:34) Indeed, and men wrote the bible. So its the blind leading the blind.
So god had to dictate the bible to a sighted person, or more specifically a person suffering from visions, like Saul of Tarsus? Saul must be smelling lots of sulfur now for zealously re-writing Jesus's script, unseen by the omniscient god.Stuart
Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 21 2009,12:34) Indeed, and men wrote the bible. So its the blind leading the blind.
And you wrote this post.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
