National Prayer Day....

[heretic888]

Robert and me ain't exactly the bestest of buddies, but I'm gonna have to go with him on this one...

Maybe your looking at all this religion thing with the viewpoint of hatred. Your only looking at it from the outside and thus misinterpreting things BIG TIME.

That's funny. Y'see, I'm a raised Baptist and went to church weekly for the better part of 10+ years --- thus, I have what could be construed as an "insider's view" on the isssue.

And, as such, I don't see at all how he misinterpreted anything in his above post. Nor do I see any real "hatred".

Baptism does only symbolize that your sins are washed away. It actually symbolizes that you publicly profess to put away your own sinful self, "washing" it away. It does not mean to wash your sins away. Only God can wash your sins away, forgiving them.

I really hate to break this to you, but you're splitting hairs here.

Whether the metanoia is inherent to the ritual itself, or whether the ritual petitions Yahveh to invoke the metanoia is of little consequence to the point Robert was trying to make. Namely, that the Christological baptism is a concealed carry-over from shamanistic times.

I say this because there is no such thing as a Shaman in Christian religion, just a Pastor who performs the act of Baptism.

Splitting hairs once again.

You feel justified in dilineating the role of the Shaman in traditional magical-animistic religions and the role of the Pastor in modern Christianity (as it is typically practiced) for absolutely no other reason that Christianity happens to be the religion you profess faith in.

Look at it this way, if we were discussing the role of a high priest or deacon in a non-Christian religion juxtaposed to that of the traditional shaman, I sincerely doubt you would be putting forward these arguments. I could point to Mithraism as a very concrete example of this.

The only real logic here is "my religion can't have them thar' Shamens in it because my religion is special and unique and right and that Shamenysm is evil and heathen". Of course, anyone with even a cursory study of Comparative Religion would tear such claims to shreds.

And there is no Magic to Baptism, just a public confession and symbolism of your Faith in Christ Jesus.

Splitting hairs again.

It doesn't seem to be 'magic' to you because it happens to be the religion that you believe in. In terms of content and claims (not going into the truthfulness of the rituals themselves), there is virtually no difference between the priest and the shaman.

Christianity does not have to do with the sacrifice of animals or Humans.

Funny, I would consider the entire context of Jesus Christ being offered up as an atonement for the sins of the world as pretty damn 'sacrificial' in content.

Human sacrifice, in symbolism if nothing else.

The term Christian only came up in the New Testament books.

That's actually not true. The term 'Christian' predates any recorded New Testamental books by at leas several decades --- and it didn't always have to do with Jesus (the Simonians were the first to claim the title).

Christ was the Final Sacrifice for our sins, the Ultimate Atonement. Christians never sacrificed human beings.

What you just described sure sounds like human sacrifice to me.

Christian tradition has never involved blood sacrifices.

That's not true at all. Many sects of early Christians sacrificed lambs all the time (as in the "Lamb of God"), and it is figured pre-eminently an almost all early Christological art (the sacrificed Christ not actually being shown in art until the 4th century).

The Jews killed Christ, not the Christians.

I think we're all familiar with the anti-Semitism of historical Christianity, no need to go into it here.

It was a one time Human sacrifice, but God sent his son for us to die for our sins and thus open a gateway to Heaven for Gentiles and Jews alike. No longer was there need for blood sacrifices, though the Jews kind of missed the whole Messiah coming.

Actually, if you follow what the Bible says, the true Christian disciple is supposed to witness the Crucifixion (i.e, Sacrifice) of Jesus Christ on a regular basis, and, furthermore, is himself expected to be Crucified with Him (At-One-Ment, as they call it) --- so that he/she may then experience the Resurrection with Him as well. Traditionally, this was re-enacted annually in mystery plays/dramas.

Hey, but wait a minute, experience death of the mortal self so as to be Resurrected in harmonious Oneness with the God-figure itself?! Gee, that doesn't sound an awful lot like that "heathen" Buddhism/Hinduism, does it?? Nahhhhhhh.....

The Communion comment was totally off base. Protestant communion is not considered symbolic Cannibalism. Christ said "Do this in rememberance of me," so I don't think a God who is Loving would tell us to use symbolic Cannibalism in Church. I mean that might be a shot in the dark, but cannibalism is a bit, well, maybe this is another shot in the dark, a bit different than love. I mean, I'm probably totally wrong that cannibalism is love and I just don't understand the whole eating people thing. I guess you kill and eat humans to show love? Hmmm, maybe I'm just so wrong. BAH!

Actually, you are just so wrong.

"He who drinketh my blood and eateth my flesh shall partake in Eternal Life." The wine, whether literally or symbolically, equals the Blood of Christ, just as the Bread/Wafer equals his Flesh. You don't get much more cannibalistic than that.

Pretty typical Mystery School stuff, really --- most of which is just carry-overs from the old 'Great Goddess' religions of sacrificial ritual (Isis, anyone?).

Anyways, You make no sense. Your ideas for National Prayer day are messed up. You still have not provided a valid excuse for why NPD is a thing that bothers you and could make you cringe when it rolls around.

Maybe because its pushing a religious belief or faith of some kind (it doesn't matter the particular type, really) on individuals that don't feel they should put up with it. I doubt you'll find many atheists sitting around praying at night.

------------

Really, looking above, the major logic in the above arguments seems to mostly be exceedingly ethnocentric in nature. Christianity doesn't have shamanism because its my religion. Christianity doesn't have sacrificial rites because its my religion. Christianity doesn't have cannibalism because its my religion.

Let's ignore the fact that Christianity is almost identical in content, if not actual substance, to many of those 'shamanistic', 'sacrificial', and 'cannibalistic' religions of the 'heathens' and 'pagans'. Let's ignore the fact that these same false argument would never be pushed for any religion other than Christianity --- even if it carbon-copied it to a T.

Because, hey, after all --- its my religion, so its gotta be infallible, right??

I reference my previous post in which I admonished taking the viewpoint of others every now and then, it will really help in opening oneself up.

Laterz.

 

[rmcrobertson]

'Cept for the part where the Heretic says that we are not good friends (never met him; don't know), he's dead right, far as I'm concerned.

 

[ShaolinWolf]

Heretic, I got a question for ya since you think you know so much...Are you a Born again Christian or did you just go to church? I mean I know so many people are say that and they just went to church. You obviously do not understand the Bible, otherwise you would not have made such naive statements. You basically stated what the Bible says without the knowledge of understanding.


Baptism does not save you, only a confession of your faith and a sybolism. I guess you kind of don't get that. Obviously. You can ask any TRUE Christian if there is magic, literally, in Baptism. Not exactly. There is a great feeling that you go Baptised, and you know you did it for Christ. Also so many other feelings, but I don't think you understand. If you got baptized, you probably thought "Well, I got dunked and that's all it was."

And If you are a Born again Christian, that was so naive. Maybe not to you or unbelievers, but in truth it is to the eyes of a believer(Christian). I know what your going to say. And I laugh until I read it. Then I'll probably laugh more. LOL.

And, Yes, I know the term Christian was only in the New Testament not being true. I was saying that the TIME of the New Testament was when the term Christian turned up. After Christ came was when. Until then, everyone was just called Jew or Gentile. Excuse me for not explaining myself further. I was making a point about Jews and Christians and the change of name and heart and distinction.

Reading between the lines helps.

:asian:

 

[CanuckMA]

The Jews killed Christ, not the Christians.

Actually, the Romans killed him.

Yes, there is a big difference there, though you obviously think otherwise. It was a one time Human sacrifice, but God sent his son for us to die for our sins and thus open a gateway to Heaven for Gentiles and Jews alike. No longer was there need for blood sacrifices, though the Jews kind of missed the whole Messiah coming.

We did not. We have a strict definition of who the Messiah will be and what he will accomplish. Jesus does not meet any of them.

 

[ShaolinWolf]

Actually, the Jews did. Yes, the romans did ithe dirty work, but the Jews wanted him dead and took part in the enacting Christ's Death. Jews deny it. The Jews were God's Chosen people and When God Sent his only son to die, He was received like every prophet that had come in the Old Testament. Amazing how the Jews say they believe in God, yet they wanted nothing to do with the Prophets God sent nor Christ, the Son of the Living God?

What Qualifications of the Messiah did Christ miss?

 

[michaeledward]

You can ask any TRUE Christian if there is magic, literally, in Baptism. Not exactly.

So, what you are telling me, is that Pope John Paul II would say that Baptism is not really a sacrament, an entry into the body of Christ, but rather just a silly tradition?

Man, I love that.

 

[heretic888]

'Cept for the part where the Heretic says that we are not good friends (never met him; don't know), he's dead right, far as I'm concerned.

Well, truth be told, I was being somewhat facetious at that part.

Heretic, I got a question for ya since you think you know so much...Are you a Born again Christian or did you just go to church?

At the time, I believed I was a "born-again Christian" as you put it --- just as much as any of the would-be evangelists parading around the world now do. And that's what it really comes down to, y'know --- belief (or, as some would put it, "true belief").

That's why all those Churches have such an incessant obsession with that thing called "faith". To them, that's the bottom line.

I mean I know so many people are say that and they just went to church.

I fail to see how one's degree of conviction is relevant here.

You obviously do not understand the Bible, otherwise you would not have made such naive statements. You basically stated what the Bible says without the knowledge of understanding.

Yeah, silly me for putting the claims of the Bible in their proper historical, psychological, and cultural context and not just blindly accepting what the Chruches spoon-feed me. Silly, silly me.

Silly me for actually knowing what 'shamanism' is in the first place, and having studied the rather perennial nature of baptismal rites (you still don't actually think that kinda stuff started with John the Baptist, do you??). Silly me for actually knowing about the cannibalistic undertones of, not just Christianity, but all Hellenistic Mystery Cults --- with their obvious carry-overs from old paganistic 'Mother Goddess' religions (the artistic parallels between Queen Isis and the 'Black Madonna' is no coincidence, young bucky). Silly me for having an actual cross-cultural understanding of religious experience, and realizing just how universal and pervasive ALL religious themes and motifs really are.

Silly, silly me for having my silly 'ol education. I suppose, next time, I should just gaggle what Mr. Pastor spoon-feeds me. Maybe then I won't be so silly.

Baptism does not save you, only a confession of your faith and a sybolism. I guess you kind of don't get that. Obviously.

Still splitting hairs, I see.

Try asking an outsider the qualitative difference of having the rite itself conveying metanoia, or whether it is just symbolic of one's attempt to receive the metanoia from Yahveh. See if he gives you any other reply but a raised eyebrow at your attempt to draw such distinctions.

And, in any event, it still reaks of shamanism.

Y'know, there's a reason in anthropology that the field-scholar attempt to have both an inside and outside understanding of a particular culture of practice. Namely, because a fish doesn't realize its wet.

You can ask any TRUE Christian if there is magic, literally, in Baptism. Not exactly.

I doubt you even know what 'magic' means. It has a very specific definition in anthropology and comparitive religion (as juxtaposed to sorcery, witchcraft, and so on).

Also, who defines what a true Christian is, in the first place?? The first people to use the title 'Christian' were Simonian Gnostics in the 2nd and 1st centuries B.C.E., and they didn't figure Jesus into their religion at all.

There is a great feeling that you go Baptised, and you know you did it for Christ. Also so many other feelings, but I don't think you understand. If you got baptized, you probably thought "Well, I got dunked and that's all it was."

Actually, no, but thanks for trying to put words into my mouth in a vain attempt to defend your beliefs.

At the time, I believed I had experienced precisely all those things --- I remember the feeling of emotional relief, the notion that I was now 'clean', and how I had promised myself to try and 'sin' as little as possible in the future to keep my now-clean slate continually 'clean'. I believed all of that, as well as believing that my Holy Father was looking out for me from above, and how truly blessed I was. This was not intellectualizing on my part, I truly and sincerely and emotionally believed all of that.

And then, I grew up. I look upon all that as so much poppycock from my youth --- which it was. I am very grateful for my upbringing and the sense of value and discipline it instilled (which is why I don't perceive Christianity or exoteric religion on the whole as being 'bad'), but I disengaged from the mythicism when my mind was ready (not that I'm an atheist, mind you).

And If you are a Born again Christian, that was so naive. Maybe not to you or unbelievers, but in truth it is to the eyes of a believer(Christian). I know what your going to say. And I laugh until I read it. Then I'll probably laugh more. LOL.

Thank you for that lovely bought of logical incoherence. I'm still trying to piece together exactly what you were trying to say.

I think what the gist of the above quotation was is "A true born-again Christian wouldn't believe that because I say so". Yes, air-tight argument there.

I still haven't seen any counterevidence, or even any logical proofs, to attempt to dispell the claims Robert and I have made. Nor do I expect to see any --- just more vague claims of naivette and how nobody but you and your ilk are "true" Christians. I'm sure Sharp Phil wrote something about that kind of arguing....

And, Yes, I know the term Christian was only in the New Testament not being true. I was saying that the TIME of the New Testament was when the term Christian turned up. After Christ came was when. Until then, everyone was just called Jew or Gentile. Excuse me for not explaining myself further. I was making a point about Jews and Christians and the change of name and heart and distinction.

Ummmm.... sorry, but wrong.

The Simonian sect of Gnosticism referred to themselves as 'Christians', and their cult predated the supposed coming of Jesus by at least 100 years. Nice try, but no dice.

See what good a study of comparitive religion can do!!

Reading between the lines helps.

This coming from the guy claiming that the Bible is literally and historically true?? Uhhh... yeah, right.

Actually, the Romans killed him.

I dunno... its pretty hard to kill a myth. Unless you live in an Orwellian world, that is.

We did not. We have a strict definition of who the Messiah will be and what he will accomplish. Jesus does not meet any of them.

Sorry, shaolin, but the man's right. One of the very interesting things about the Pauline texts, when they first arose (probably in the hands of Marcion), was the decidedly Hellenistic and Greek slant they gave on the 'Khristos'. The Jewish conception of Messiah at the time was decidedly different than the later Christian conception of a supernatural Savior God (very Mithraic/Dionysian, methinks).

I mean, honestly, that's what Christianity itself was --- it was a 'Jewish' attempt at a Hellenistic Mystery School. It has all the standard Mystery elements: a Holy Meal (Eucharist) in which the initiate becomes one with the God Man by consuming him, symbolic Death and Resurrection of the initiate with the God Man, the Goddess figure as the dual Mother and Bride of the God Man (symbolized in the New Testament with the two 'Marys'), a baptismal rite of metanoia (repentance), heavy emphasis on agrarian symbolism like vines, seeds, bread, and plants in general, and the strong moral emphasis on a 'Golden Rule' (ubiquitous among the Hellenistic philosophers, going as far back as Pythagoras).

All that was put within a vague Jewish cultural backdrop.

Actually, the Jews did. Yes, the romans did ithe dirty work, but the Jews wanted him dead and took part in the enacting Christ's Death.

Prove it. Cite a historical reference from the time that claims this is so.

What Qualifications of the Messiah did Christ miss?

I don't think what you're grasping here, shaolin, is that the Jewish conception of Messiah and the Christian/Hellenistic conception of Christ are fudnamentally different ideas and beliefs.

So, what you are telling me, is that Pope John Paul II would say that Baptism is not really a sacrament, an entry into the body of Christ, but rather just a silly tradition?

You're more likely to hear a brief anti-Catholic rant on how the Vatican is corrupt and evil, and how Catholicism preaches paganistic ideas like the Trinity and Saint-worship and all that crud --- although, I fail to see how the idea of a 'virgin birth' and 'eating the flesh and blood of the god to achieve Eternal Life' and 'death and resurrection of the god on the third day' aren't Pagan ideas in themselves.

Oh well. Laterz.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Not the least sign that Christianity has its--let's just say, "elements"-- is that so many of its believers have a need to rant about their Only True Faith, and immediately couple this to ranting about, "the Jews."

Charming. Shameful, but charming.

 

[someguy]

I think we are getting to the point of splitting splits in hairs that have been split before. I guess its kind of intresting though. All this because of me. Welll have fun I'll le y'all fight for abit longer then try to remember what the original topic of this was...At least this is intresting I guess.

 

[CanuckMA]

Actually, the Jews did. Yes, the romans did ithe dirty work, but the Jews wanted him dead and took part in the enacting Christ's Death. Jews deny it. The Jews were God's Chosen people and When God Sent his only son to die, He was received like every prophet that had come in the Old Testament. Amazing how the Jews say they believe in God, yet they wanted nothing to do with the Prophets God sent nor Christ, the Son of the Living God?

Jews couldn't have cared less. The High Priest at the time was a Roman puppet. There are so many blatant violations of Jewish law in the crucifiction story that it's not even funny.

What Qualifications of the Messiah did Christ miss?

Let's see, of the top of my head...

A MAN of David's line - that's thru the father.
Will unify the Jewish kingdoms
Will bring world peace

What else do you want.

 

[someguy]

Just for the fun of it revelations has yet to come. As such Jesus is supposed to come back.
He was sort of a an of Davids line. I'm not up on my biblical stuff enough to go through wiht that thought I'm sure some one else will. By the way I said sort of.

 

[CanuckMA]

Just for the fun of it revelations has yet to come. As such Jesus is supposed to come back.
He was sort of a an of Davids line. I'm not up on my biblical stuff enough to go through wiht that thought I'm sure some one else will. By the way I said sort of.

The Jewish Messiah is not 'sort of of David's line'
He is not the 'son of God'
He'll do the job right the first time.

 

[heretic888]

Just for the fun of it revelations has yet to come. As such Jesus is supposed to come back.

Technically speaking, the Revelation of John is a Christian revision of a 1st century Jewish apocalypse (meaning, they added 'Jesus' and 'Christ' in a few select places to make it appear as a Christian text). Most of the stuff in there is in reference to the Roman authorities of the time.

 

[ShaolinWolf]

Yes, I'll say it. Call me a fool, an idiot, whatever you want. I BELIEVE THE BIBLE IS 100% ACCURATE AND TRUE. And, I'm not a Baptist. I'm a Christian. Baptist is only a denomination. Just like Methodist. I just like Baptist because it's a great, sound doctrine. No I do not go to one of those baptist, hell fire and brimstone Churches. Nor is it Fundamentalist. There are Churchs for that, but I don't really care for the screaming.


I believe that the only way to Heaven is through a personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Baptism won't save you. Church of Christ believes that. And just to let you know, I know your thinking it, I'm not some careless, unknowledgable person. I've done my research. I don't get "spoon-fed" at Church. I believe what I'm taught at Church. But I also do PLENTY of independent studies. I imagine you think the stuff I read is a bunch of hooey, but go ahead, it's doesn't affect me. Heck, you think the Bible is hooey. I mean, you just said it's not accurately and historically correct.

God wrote the Bible as a Love letter to us.(yes, I believe he wrote it. You think otherwise, we know that. So don't say what everyone else says. It's infallible. That's that. I believe it. You don't. So don't waste part of your post saying all that. Some of us believe it, some don't.) To teach us. Historians have found a TON of things from the Bible that they could not find in any other history log/book/tablet/etc. And when were they able to disprove the Bible. It's all speculation. the book has been finished for 2000(ok, maybe off by a few hundred) years; even the Old Testament is infallible. They can't find anything infallible. We've even found talk of the Terrorist attack back in 9/11. I'll have to find it again, but there is so much foretelling of the future, though we don't understand it all because it's from God. How can we understand everything God understands. We can't, otherwise we'd be God.

I guess We don't have much to talk about here, seeing as we are merely tearing each other's posts apart. I've done this bout several times before, on here, out there, and everywhere. It all ends the same. On here, we just argue and junk and it never does anything other than change the topic of the thread. It's really a one-sided arguement for each of us. We never see the other's point of view.

On another note, Faith is one of the only things that does matter. You can go to church all you want, sing praises til you are hoarse, read the Bible til you go blind, and even preach til everyone in your church is saved. You can even get baptized a billion times. I've see it all before. But the one thing that will keep you from Christ is not having Faith. You need to accept Christ as Personal Lord and savior and believe he died and rose for you. Saying your a sinner(I know your going to say sarcastically along the lines of, "Thank you for telling me I'm a sinner. Blah blah blah" I didn't point you out, just stated what I was stating) and asking for forgiveness.

And the Jews taking part in Killing Jesus, That's what they'd like you to think. It's just a hush hush thing that has been denied over the past 2000 years. But I can't give you anything more than you've read.

What do you say of the Complete Jews? The term has been coined for the Jews that have fully understood Christ's Love and have turned to the Bible for answers. What is your take on that, CanuckMA?

Also, Christ was of the Line of David, look in Matthew 1:1-17. As to the other stuff, He will come back and bring world peace to everyone. Then everyone will know he is Lord. It'll be a sad time when those who are not saved see him and it's too late. They will plead and plead, but He will cast them into the Lake of fire because they CHOSE not to know him and rather follow their own whims. I know I'll get plenty of backlash for these last few comments, heck the whole post, but God doesn't want anyone to Perish, yet the majority will.

:asian:

 

[CanuckMA]

Yes, I'll say it. Call me a fool, an idiot, whatever you want. I BELIEVE THE BIBLE IS 100% ACCURATE AND TRUE.
even the Old Testament is infallible.

Be about time you start following the 613 mitzvot then

And the Jews taking part in Killing Jesus, That's what they'd like you to think. It's just a hush hush thing that has been denied over the past 2000 years. But I can't give you anything more than you've read.

Yeah, yeah. And we own all the banks, control the world. You are one sick, deluded puppy.

What do you say of the Complete Jews? The term has been coined for the Jews that have fully understood Christ's Love and have turned to the Bible for answers. What is your take on that, CanuckMA?

The term has been coined by organizations like Jews For Jesus. All are Xtian orgs trying to convert Jews. Jews care about them about as much as we care about gnats. They are annoying, but insignificant.

Also, Christ was of the Line of David, look in Matthew 1:1-17.
:asian:

If Mary was a virgin, anf lineage if from the father, he can't be of the line of David.

 

[ShaolinWolf]

I don't believe the control the world and banks thing. Put words in my mouth, why don'cha! Jews are not nazi terrorists. I know that. Don't think I'm that naive. Amazing you put words in my mouth and then call me a sick deluded puppy for what you said. LOL...ROFL!!!! :rofl:

:asian:

 

[CanuckMA]

And of course you are the only one in possession of documented proof that Jews wanted to and inded did killed Jesus. And that Jews wanted Xtians exterminated....

 

[ShaolinWolf]

Hmmmm, ask other Christians. I'm not the only one with the "proof" a you call it. It's just plain fact.

 

[heretic888]

Yes, I'll say it. Call me a fool, an idiot, whatever you want. I BELIEVE THE BIBLE IS 100% ACCURATE AND TRUE.

Good for you.

You stick with your belief and faith, and I'll stick with my historical research and evidence. Then, we'll both be happy.

And, I'm not a Baptist. I'm a Christian. Baptist is only a denomination. Just like Methodist. I just like Baptist because it's a great, sound doctrine. No I do not go to one of those baptist, hell fire and brimstone Churches. Nor is it Fundamentalist. There are Churchs for that, but I don't really care for the screaming.

Oh great, now he's implying there is a purely 'Christian' religion devoid of any denominational ties. How amusing.

Oh, and as a side note, the Baptist church I was raised on was not particularly 'fire and brimstone' (i.e., no screaming or shouting --- although there was the conception of Hell), but I would call them fundamenatalist (literalist).

I believe that the only way to Heaven is through a personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Baptism won't save you. Church of Christ believes that.

How exactly can a collective group possess something (beliefs) that only conscious, sentient individuals have??

And just to let you know, I know your thinking it, I'm not some careless, unknowledgable person.

Could'a fooled me.

I've done my research. I don't get "spoon-fed" at Church.

Uh-huh. I did my "research" when I was a Baptist, too.

But I also do PLENTY of independent studies. I imagine you think the stuff I read is a bunch of hooey, but go ahead, it's doesn't affect me. Heck, you think the Bible is hooey. I mean, you just said it's not accurately and historically correct.

Not just that, but its contradictory in parts. Now, this isn't a problem if you don't subscribe to literalism/fundamentalism, and can perhaps acknowledge a symbolic reading of the Bible. If not, well, you're screwed.

God wrote the Bible as a Love letter to us.

Sorry, God, but I don't swing that way. I'm a girl-only kinda guy.

yes, I believe he wrote it. You think otherwise, we know that.

I don't just think otherwise, I know otherwise. I have personally seen transcriptions of the Bible dating from different times (one at the 300's, one at the 700's, one at the 1300's, and one current) --- and, in every case, there have been dozens upon dozens of changes in text, wording, context. Hell, its almost universally accepted now among scholars that the 'resurrection scene' in Mark was a later addition to the original text (generally dated to the 300's or 400's).

I also know that different parts of 'the Bible' were written by proponents of different schools of thought. The Paul of the Galatians and the Paul of the Pastorals espouse decidedly different visions and mission statements.

Written by God, my ****.

Historians have found a TON of things from the Bible that they could not find in any other history log/book/tablet/etc. And when were they able to disprove the Bible. It's all speculation.

No, its called 'proof'. If you had even a cursory understanding of empiricism and the scientific method, you'd realize this.

If the Bible claims something for which we have counterevidence (for example, that there was a census around the time the NT claims), then the Bible, as literal text, is wrong. Period. Its not a history book, its a religious text.

even the Old Testament is infallible. They can't find anything infallible.

You realize you just contradicted yourself, right??

We've even found talk of the Terrorist attack back in 9/11. I'll have to find it again, but there is so much foretelling of the future, though we don't understand it all because it's from God. How can we understand everything God understands. We can't, otherwise we'd be God.

Uh-huh, right.

I'm sure that it was the same verses people were claiming "predicted" World War II during the 40's and 50's. Or the founding of the United States in the 1700's. Curiously enough, however, no one seems to be able to "find" these predictions until after the events have already happened.

Hindsight is 20/20, my friends.

I guess We don't have much to talk about here, seeing as we are merely tearing each other's posts apart.

No, I'm tearing your posts apart. You're reaking of desperation.

That's generally what happens when you get evidence vs faith --- evidence wins every time.

It's really a one-sided arguement for each of us. We never see the other's point of view.

Oh, I see your point of view fine. Its called sociocentrism --- namely, my People/Country, right or wrong. In this case, of course, its applied to My Religion, right or wrong.

On another note, Faith is one of the only things that does matter. You can go to church all you want, sing praises til you are hoarse, read the Bible til you go blind, and even preach til everyone in your church is saved. You can even get baptized a billion times. I've see it all before. But the one thing that will keep you from Christ is not having Faith. You need to accept Christ as Personal Lord and savior and believe he died and rose for you. Saying your a sinner(I know your going to say sarcastically along the lines of, "Thank you for telling me I'm a sinner. Blah blah blah" I didn't point you out, just stated what I was stating) and asking for forgiveness.

And this has what relevance here??

And the Jews taking part in Killing Jesus, That's what they'd like you to think. It's just a hush hush thing that has been denied over the past 2000 years. But I can't give you anything more than you've read.

I will say it again: prove it. Cite the historical sources that prove 'the Jews' were involved in the death of this supposed Jesus Christ.

Also, Christ was of the Line of David, look in Matthew 1:1-17.

No, he wasn't.

The New Testamental books of Luke and Matthew trace Jesus back to David through Joshua (both, curiously, using different lineages, though). The rub is, however, that Joshua is not Jesus' father (according to the story) --- Jehovah is. Thus, the literalist Christian is left with with a dilemma:

1) Jesus was not born of a virgin and is not the Son of God, but is of David's bloodline.

2) Jesus was born of a virgin and is the Son of God, but is not of David's bloodline and thus not the Jewish Messiah.

As to the other stuff, He will come back and bring world peace to everyone. Then everyone will know he is Lord. It'll be a sad time when those who are not saved see him and it's too late. They will plead and plead, but He will cast them into the Lake of fire because they CHOSE not to know him and rather follow their own whims. I know I'll get plenty of backlash for these last few comments, heck the whole post, but God doesn't want anyone to Perish, yet the majority will.

Very interesting behavior for the 'God of Love'.

*chuckles* Laterz.

 

[Nightingale]

ok... just a pre-emptive warning that the mods are keeping an eye on this thread. Some posts are approaching lines we don't want crossed.

Feel free to discuss the issue at hand, which is National Prayer Day. Feel free to take any off-topic discussion (anything not about National Prayer Day) and start a new thread.

Thanks much!

-Nightingale-
MT MOD