Speaking in GoDs Language

[Add Homonym]

Again, very debatable subject that has not been proven with 100% certainty. Yet 3 Historical persons have written about Him or His followers in non-secular writings. Oh but wait....... "even they are forged"

They weren't forged. They were just written, like LOTR. Paul and his merry band of look-a-likes wrote his load of crap, which contradicts Matthew. Matthew wrote his load of crap, which was then redacted a few times by random people (just so it didn't look like Justin's version), and then John wrote his obvious load of crap, which avoids all the contents of Matthew. Luke then copied Matthew and made it look like he'd got it from different sources, then wrote a fairy tale about Paul, so that his crappy interpolated contradictory ramblings would be seen as authoritative.

The church then combines the message of various Pauls, with some other documents it found, lying around, and said "THIS IS THE TRUTH, BECAUSE WE SAY SO."

"Wooooo everything was concocted just to enslave the general public to authoritative rule"...................... But Jesus Christ's message goes against this very accusation.

You can subjugate a population using the message of Jesus and Paul, because, firstly, someone added Romans 13 into schizo-Paul's writing.
http://bible.org/article/paul-and-civil-obedience-romans-131-7

Secondly, people are now so afraid of hell, that they act like self-flagellating sheep and pay taxes to authoritarian church empires, instead of violently resisting them, because they are talking crap. The only method that Christianity allows for resisting the state, is to put yourself in front of the bulldozers, and be run over. Buddhism is also a good method of control, because you are taught that it's all your fault, so put up with being whipped. Any religion is a good source of guilt and elitism that you can exploit to build a power structure. The instant that Christians created a church, they made a power structure. This endorsed the Pauls.

Eventually, it was science and Papal corruption that undid the state grip of Christianity, because science shows that it all a load of shit.

You are right, though, if each person came to his own understanding of Christ, based on writings they dug up from archeological digs, then people would have their own version of Christianity to resist the state. However, only my version of it would be correct, and I would be better than you for knowing it, and you would have to join my church and do what I say.

[pianodwarf]

What.... there is no GOD...? Even some of the most intelligent minds wont rule out the possibility.

"And this is my point:"

Evolution...?  Can you show me where the Bible refutes this...?

The bible doesn't refute anything.  It's a collection of claims, almost entirely unsupported.

Jesus never existed...? Again, very debatable subject that has not been proven with 100% certainty.

What do you mean, specifically, by "Jesus"?  That there was a Jewish rabbi around that time by that name?  Probably true.  I haven't researched this area of bible scholarship very much yet, but according to Ehrman, most scholars are agreed that there was a preacher named Jesus.  Whether the gospels are historically accurate, however, is an entirely different matter, and one on which there is no general agreement.

Personally, I find it rather bizarre that anyone can take the claims in the gospels seriously, especially when it comes to things like a whole slew of people rising from the dead and walking all over a city -- an event which would seem to be kind of a big deal, and yet which is not reported or even referenced by anybody else anywhere else.

Yet 3 Historical persons have written about Him or His followers in non-secular writings. Oh but wait....... "even they are forged"

I assume you're referring to the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, here?  Strictly speaking, those are not "forgeries" because we don't know who wrote them.  By definition, an anonymous document cannot be a forgery.  Other books in the new testament, however, are forgeries -- 1 Peter and 2 Peter are both forged, for example, and at least four of the letters claiming Pauline authorship are also forgeries.

[Omen]

Why does your religious ideology act just like the tautological insular self serving beliefs of a cult?

You can label anything you want a "cult".

Nope.  A cult is specifically a type of ideological group that tries to isolate itself from outside influences in order to maintain itself.   You, when faced with answers you don't like, demean and dismiss people out of hand as 'not hearing' 'not listening' 'not understanding'.  You offer no explanation other than it doesn't confirm what you want to believe, so you don't like it.

  I am not trying to convert you but help you understand

You're not helping me understand anything by mindlessly making shit up, ignoring everything I say, and never offering to explaining yourself.  You are in effect solidifying the case against you that you are either mentally ill or intentionally trying to troll a forum out of deception.

If you wanted to 'help' us understand, then you would provide a conclusive means of determining how you know what you claim to know and by what means you conclude anything.  You are not the sole authority of knowledge and you are speaking as if YOU are your own god that you claim.

that GODS

God what?

And you were able to determine any of this how?

Haven't mentioned any particular religious flavor at all

Except christianity.

Not once have I asked you do  join anything or threaten you with fear.

You've just mindless insisted that we can't hear, can't listen, to what you have a magical all knowing ability to know without any means to demonstrate how you could know.  Then you demean us for daring to question your own arrogant insistence that you know it.

All I have said is that Jesus Christ

That would be christianity.  It is a religion.

to help you understand that GOD is not a respecter of persons

This isn't 'helping'.  This is a mindless assertion delivered upon no facts, no valid premises, and not even a congruent series of arguments to rationally explain anything.  For all intents in purposes you're not telling me anything and your ranting is no different then the babbling of a mentally ill person in an asylum.

died to give it to. Jesus Christ.

No one died for me and no one can die for me.  Metaphors do not exist in reality.  You're not casting spells by evoking rhetoric, because magic doesn't exist.  Jesus Christ is a myth, christianity is a myth, and it has no historical or theological basis.  Jesus does not fulfill Judaic Messianic Prophecy, Judaic myths never existed, there would be no garden of eden or fall to have original sin, much less reason to sacrifice someone to account for being guilty of something before I even exist.

While at the same time strongly rebuking the self righteous, "religious" people. Calling them hypocrites.

Imagine that a self righteous religious fanatic calling other self righteous religious fanatics hypocrites. 

Laying heavy burdens on the backs of people, they themselves wouldn't lift a finger to help. Nor could they keep the law entirely themselves.

Oh poor jesus.. oh how he's persecuted because no one would believe he's the son of god.

Why are you so insecure about your religious beliefs as to interpret questions and higher criticism as an "attack"?

Not so much as an attack but there is no reason for anyone here to be rude.

You receive what you give.

I get that most of you do not understand. If you would just open your ears and listen...

And back to the insane part.  Demonstrate that you understand anything in a means that would allow you to determine other people do not understand.

[Omen]

I have said that I claim no denominational or religious affiliation. I do not deny the Deity of Christ. My Mothers side of my family were raised Pentecostal. When I was little. I claimed that. But as I got older, by faith I stopped claiming any affiliation. Not that I am against my Brothers and Sisters in The Lord. I love people. And by faith I am choosing to trust in GOD.

There are tens of thousands of god claims, it is not narrowly limited to your god claim or no god claim.  Jesus is part of the religion of christianity, you are espousing a version of christianity similar to evangelical protestantism.

[Omen]

He was fulfilling scripture as it was written. He knew that and even prophesied about it before it happened to His disciples. It wasn't that He was scared to die. He knew He would be risen again. He was obedient to GODS will. He drank the cup of GODS wrath that was intended for others.

Jesus does not fulfill Judaic messianic prophecy; Christian theology ignores much of Jewish eschatology, makes up its own 'messianic' prophecy, and sweeps the rest under the rug of the 'second coming'.  The second coming is made up literally out of thin air and it, like many claims of Jesus fulfilling prophecy, have little to no scriptural basis.

[Omen]

No, I have only seen the evidence of GOD by faith. Even The Lord Jesus Christ.

Faith is believing things without evidence.

How can you have evidence delivered by faith?

[Omen]

This is an unknowable question. Many have left their religion because of Jesus Christ. Even today. Persecuted even unto death in foreign lands. Being ousted amongst their communities. Why is that...?

It is not unknowable at all.  The spread and propagation of religion is directly linked to geographical location, birth rates, and genocidal warfare.

Christianity is also not 'growing' by any leaps and bounds, in fact is i barely holding its own against Islam and Christianity had about an 800 year head start.   Muslims are quickly approaching the point where they outnumber christianis, using your logic, does there religion become true the second there is one more Muslim than Christian?

[Azdgari]

Come on man, you could'a put that in 2 posts...

[velkyn]

No, He was fulfilling The scripture in front of there very eyes but they didn't recognize it. (Psalm 22)

It is finished...!!!!!!        (Victory)

Explain this....

Why if He lost His faith in GOD, did He declare "it is finished"...?

and like so many Christians you fail to realize your bible has your supposed savior saying contradictory things durign the cruxifiction.  You pick and choose what you want demonstrating yet again that you've made up your own religion.

[Omen]

There are no messages of all inclusive love in the bible, nor quoted by jesus, and in fact we have the exact opposite to offer as conjecture against your own supposition.  The bible expressly defines the value of human life based on around a belief vs non-belief in religious superstition.  The parable in Luke 19:27 specifically concludes upon this line:

"Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."

In context, those enemies are those who would not believe, specifically those who were Jews at the time and since this is supposedly Jesus, those jews would not believe that Jesus confirms their messianic prophecy ( ignoring that jesus has nothing to do with Judaic Messianic Prophecy ).  Jews, or non-believers, are condemned expressly because they do not believe and their non-belief at face value is being posited as the active persecution of Jesus.  That is an incredibly narcissistic method of dehumanizing people out the of sake of imagining slights against yourself.  This is also precisely how this verse and the parable it is associated with is interpreted in christian apologetics.

From Gills Commentary:  Luke 19:27

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/luke-19-27.html

But those mine enemies
Meaning particularly the Jews, who were enemies to the person of Christ, and hated and rejected him, as the King Messiah; and rebelled against him, and would not submit to his government; and were enemies to his people, and were exceeding mad against them, and persecuted them; and to his Gospel, and the distinguishing truths of it, and to his ordinances, which they rejected against themselves:

No where does Jesus advocate the love of all and in fact his love is only delivered upon the dichotomy of loving thy brother vs loving thy enemy; thy brother IN CONTEXT only refers to your fellow believer and the love of your enemy is juxtaposed against the numerous condemnations of everyone who does not believe to receive what they are due in hell.  No where does the bible ever make a reference to a person who does not believe without a strident string of pejorative labels.  We, as non-believers, are expressly defined as the enemy; we are evil; we are the anti-christ; we are liars who have not confessed that jesus has come in the flesh; telling us about the word of christ is like casting pearls before swine; we are beasts, perverts, idolators; we are fools who and none of us can do good.

The bible is filled with self serving tautological scripture that does nothing but reinforce the in group and hatefully dehumanize the out group.  It condemns knowledge and advocates deference to myth out fear, both fear of an imagined after life and fear of those it so woefully demonizes as the out group.  The god it paints is an idiot; an incompetent imbecile that creates an existence knowing it would not fit its own expectations and then punishes it for being as imperfect as it designed it to be.  We are condemned before we exist, for an action we could have no choice in and that robs us of any will to choose.  Choice is further taken from us in the supposed redemption for a crime we are guilty of that we can't rationally take responsibility for by a sacrifice ( that really isn't a sacrifice ) that robs us of whether or not we would ever allow it to occur or even if someone else could take responsibility for our own imagined guilt from us.  Then we are told that this is a 'gift' that we must accept or else face terrible fate, raped of all of our will and ability to make a choice about anything other than forceful compulsion under a threat of violence.  The sacrifice itself is totally meaningless since a god need not sacrifice anything or could sacrifice anything it cannot have instantly again, the sacrifice of Jesus is akin to a child kicking over a pile of stones that can be stacked up again.  Ignoring of course that the garden of eden never existed, the fall never happened, and jesus would have been murdered for a metaphor anyway.. which just makes it even more devoid of any inherent rational meaning.

The remnants of the old testament are nested in a misogynistic and genocidal tribal like mindset that is only fractionally toned down in the new testament.  The ideology its promoted for nearly 2000 years has been on the ass end of every progressive societal development in existence and we've only ever progressed society at the cost and sacrifice of religious thought.

[Samothec]

No one died for me and no one can die for me.

This lead me to think of the instance wherte someone "dies for" someone else by taking a bullet for them or giving them something that will save their life even though both people need it. (Circumstances far, far more prevalent in movies and TV than in reality.)

This leads to linking the premises that Jesus "died for our sins" and the idea that death only occurs because of sin. If both of these were true then we would see people living forever if they had truly and completely accepted Jesus as their savior. This either means there has never been anyone who completely accepted Jesus as their savior or that at least one of those premises was false.

[The Gawd]

No one died for me and no one can die for me.

This lead me to think of the instance wherte someone "dies for" someone else by taking a bullet for them or giving them something that will save their life even though both people need it. (Circumstances far, far more prevalent in movies and TV than in reality.)

This leads to linking the premises that Jesus "died for our sins" and the idea that death only occurs because of sin. If both of these were true then we would see people living forever if they had truly and completely accepted Jesus as their savior. This either means there has never been anyone who completely accepted Jesus as their savior or that at least one of those premises was false.

Ive heard or read that jesus supposedly went to hell for the three days before "rising" again. theoretically would explain the "dying for you" in that now you dont have to go to hell. But as is typical theres christians falling on both sides of this debate as per this website (that concludes he did NOT go to hell) http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-go-to-hell.html

[Samothec]

This leads to linking the premises that Jesus "died for our sins" and the idea that death only occurs because of sin. If both of these were true then we would see people living forever if they had truly and completely accepted Jesus as their savior. This either means there has never been anyone who completely accepted Jesus as their savior or that at least one of those premises was false.

Ive heard or read that jesus supposedly went to hell for the three days before "rising" again. theoretically would explain the "dying for you" in that now you dont have to go to hell. But as is typical theres christians falling on both sides of this debate as per this website (that concludes he did NOT go to hell) http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-go-to-hell.html

That is the usual explanation Jesus is a Xian's get-out-of-hell-free card. But the idea of "original sin" says that people now die because of A&E's sin. If Xianity was internally consistant and true then people who believed in the right way would not die. But everyone dies. So another point where their beliefs are shown to be delusions.

[KingofBashan]

That is the usual explanation Jesus is a Xian's get-out-of-hell-free card. But the idea of "original sin" says that people now die because of A&E's sin. If Xianity was internally consistant and true then people who believed in the right way would not die. But everyone dies. So another point where their beliefs are shown to be delusions.

Christianity teaches that everyone inherits sin and death. What Christ does is free us from the bondage of our sins. The gospel is that through simple faith we can enjoy the righteousness of Jesus, which gains for us two things: acceptance with God, and the hope of eternal life. A  believer is united to Jesus Christ, which means we will die, but we will be resurrected.

[sun_king]

A  believer is united to Jesus Christ, which means we will die, but we will be resurrected.

Out of curiosity, what happens to the non-believer? And I am a Hindu, so Christ is not exactly in my list of deities in case I choose to believe. What can happen to me?

[12 Monkeys]

and there are followers that have been waiting 1900 or more years for resurrection...how much longer must they wait?

[12 Monkeys]

That is the usual explanation Jesus is a Xian's get-out-of-hell-free card. But the idea of "original sin" says that people now die because of A&E's sin. If Xianity was internally consistant and true then people who believed in the right way would not die. But everyone dies. So another point where their beliefs are shown to be delusions.

Christianity teaches that everyone inherits sin and death. What Christ does is free us from the bondage of our sins. The gospel is that through simple faith we can enjoy the righteousness of Jesus, which gains for us two things: acceptance with God, and the hope of eternal life. A  believer is united to Jesus Christ, which means we will die, but we will be resurrected.

Why exactly (and I have never recieved a good answer) did God have Jesus killed? and why did he not wait for the age of cell phone cameras and personal recording devices? Much more convincing than a bunch of scriblings from random people about Jesus LONG after he died(if he even existed)

[JeffPT]

Christianity teaches that everyone inherits sin and death. What Christ does is free us from the bondage of our sins. The gospel is that through simple faith we can enjoy the righteousness of Jesus, which gains for us two things: acceptance with God, and the hope of eternal life. A  believer is united to Jesus Christ, which means we will die, but we will be resurrected.

Imagine for a second there is a list... And on that list, you have a few sentences detailing the beliefs of each and every religion that has ever been known to man.  If you place within that list (somewhere in the middle) exactly what you wrote here, and looked at it side by side with the other thousands and thousands of religions that have ever been, do you know of any real world evidence that would make it stand out from the rest as having the greatest possibility of truth?   





 

[12 Monkeys]

This leads to linking the premises that Jesus "died for our sins" and the idea that death only occurs because of sin. If both of these were true then we would see people living forever if they had truly and completely accepted Jesus as their savior. This either means there has never been anyone who completely accepted Jesus as their savior or that at least one of those premises was false.

Ive heard or read that jesus supposedly went to hell for the three days before "rising" again. theoretically would explain the "dying for you" in that now you dont have to go to hell. But as is typical theres christians falling on both sides of this debate as per this website (that concludes he did NOT go to hell) http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-go-to-hell.html

That is the usual explanation Jesus is a Xian's get-out-of-hell-free card. But the idea of "original sin" says that people now die because of A&E's sin. If Xianity was internally consistant and true then people who believed in the right way would not die. But everyone dies. So another point where their beliefs are shown to be delusions.

heheh not only that but if it did happen,it's this God guys fault for 1) not explaining the consequences of the actions to a very STUPID A & E  2)not stopping the actions of the snake  3) making a human in his likeness but the brain of a small monkey


thats not even bringing in the fact that his creation went downhill FAST from there on in so much so (according to the story) he had to kill everbody by flooding the world,when that failed he turned to human sacrifice

[KingofBashan]

A  believer is united to Jesus Christ, which means we will die, but we will be resurrected.

Out of curiosity, what happens to the non-believer? And I am a Hindu, so Christ is not exactly in my list of deities in case I choose to believe. What can happen to me?

Eternal separation from God, biblically known as the second death.

[12 Monkeys]

A  believer is united to Jesus Christ, which means we will die, but we will be resurrected.

Out of curiosity, what happens to the non-believer? And I am a Hindu, so Christ is not exactly in my list of deities in case I choose to believe. What can happen to me?

Eternal separation from God, biblically known as the second death.

what proof do you have of this? In my nation of origin we are reincarnated,so heaven and hell are as fake as reincarnation is to you

[KingofBashan]

Why exactly (and I have never recieved a good answer) did God have Jesus killed? and why did he not wait for the age of cell phone cameras and personal recording devices? Much more convincing than a bunch of scriblings from random people about Jesus LONG after he died(if he even existed)

God did not have Jesus killed. Jesus gave up his own life. He gave up his life to pay the legal penalty against those who believe in him. The Bible teaches Christ came in the "fullness of time", which means he came exactly when God wanted him to.

I have a question for you. What makes you think that Jesus would be more credible today? Everyone would simply claim the evidence had been photoshopped, manipulated etc. From your perspective, what makes modern media more credible than the writings of the Apostles?

[KingofBashan]

A  believer is united to Jesus Christ, which means we will die, but we will be resurrected.

Out of curiosity, what happens to the non-believer? And I am a Hindu, so Christ is not exactly in my list of deities in case I choose to believe. What can happen to me?

Eternal separation from God, biblically known as the second death.

what proof do you have of this? In my nation of origin we are reincarnated,so heaven and hell are as fake as reincarnation is to you

What proof do you have of re-incarnation?

[KingofBashan]

Christianity teaches that everyone inherits sin and death. What Christ does is free us from the bondage of our sins. The gospel is that through simple faith we can enjoy the righteousness of Jesus, which gains for us two things: acceptance with God, and the hope of eternal life. A  believer is united to Jesus Christ, which means we will die, but we will be resurrected.

Imagine for a second there is a list... And on that list, you have a few sentences detailing the beliefs of each and every religion that has ever been known to man.  If you place within that list (somewhere in the middle) exactly what you wrote here, and looked at it side by side with the other thousands and thousands of religions that have ever been, do you know of any real world evidence that would make it stand out from the rest as having the greatest possibility of truth?   

The real world evidence that makes it stand out is the witness of the Bible.

[Samothec]

Eternal separation from God, biblically known as the second death.

Since god does not make his presence felt in this world, we are already separated from god. How is the second death any different from the world we live in? Or are you saying we are already in hell/eternally separated from god?

[KingofBashan]

Eternal separation from God, biblically known as the second death.

Since god does not make his presence felt in this world, we are already separated from god. How is the second death any different from the world we live in? Or are you saying we are already in hell/eternally separated from god?

In many ways we are dead already. We are dead and dying. The evidence for that is everywhere. But we still enjoy the presence of God to a certain degree. For example, the laws of physics are upheld so that we can enjoy some stability to our daily existence, food still tastes good and warms the belly, and we can hear the sound of music. But this is all passing away. So physically speaking, we are not separated from God. But spiritually speaking, we are. We are already separated from God spiritually speaking. We will not trust in him unless something happens to make us spiritually alive.

[sun_king]

Eternal separation from God, biblically known as the second death.

Guess what, I am not particularly worried. You have one book and we have several dozen, each older than yours. Now its just a matter of stating which book is more "authentic".

[KingofBashan]

Eternal separation from God, biblically known as the second death.

Guess what, I am not particularly worried. You have one book and we have several dozen, each older than yours. Now its just a matter of stating which book is more "authentic".

Authoritative. I wouldn't dispute your books' authenticity, but I might dispute their authority.

[Samothec]

In many ways we are dead already. We are dead and dying. The evidence for that is everywhere. But we still enjoy the presence of God to a certain degree. For example, the laws of physics are upheld so that we can enjoy some stability to our daily existence, food still tastes good and warms the belly, and we can hear the sound of music. But this is all passing away. So physically speaking, we are not separated from God. But spiritually speaking, we are. We are already separated from God spiritually speaking. We will not trust in him unless something happens to make us spiritually alive.

So you are saying god makes food taste good or bad? Why make foods that are bad for us taste good? And why make foods that are good for us taste bad? Why does everyone have different sensations for what tastes good and bad?

Why doesn't god change the laws of physics to keep good people from dying?