Opinions on Chirst...

[millionman]

I want to know what the members of this forum think about Jesus of Nazareth??? Who was he??? Just say what you think, It's clear what my views are, but I want to hear what you guys think.

[Bib]

I believe He was and is the Son of God. That He was and is the Messiah written about in the OT.

That He lived and died to make an everlasting statement and to allow everyone the opportunity to enter the Kingdom. It worked very well.

Bigger

[Wurkz2hard]

Frankly, while I totally respect everyones right to believe in what they want I find it very hard to believe that a text written thousands of years ago, and then translated probably a thousand times or more has any credibility of any kind. Did Jesus exist? Who knows. Does God exist? Who knows.

While some people are willing to take such things purely on faith, I am not. I'm grounded in the real world but that's not the disparage anyone elses beliefs here. I kind of view Jesus/God much like the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.

[samzman]

i believe there was a jesus, and i do believe that he was a holy man. however there are other holy men too with evidence that they existed. like buddha. he was a prince and was doccumented as being so, and they even have his ashes burried in a stupa "holy burial ground"...at least that's the best way to explain it. i recently became a taoist, and before hand i was raised unitarian. i was raised believing jesus was a great person, helped out many and was very close with god, some believed he was the son, others didn't. however he was a man, period..though he was an extraordinary man. after he died he did become more, and is the jesus of the trinity. taosim opened up my mind thinking that with reincarnation, maybe the other dieties are forms of jesus himself. buddha, maybe he was the reincarnation of jesus christ. one of the church members created a painting of jesus, buddha, siva, and all the other dieties together in heaven. he saw it in his dream and put it right onto the canvas. i found that to hold true to what i believe. in my mind, being open to spirituality and the love of nature and graditude of life, then you're on the way to the kingdom of heaven.

alright so i got carried away with the answer lol. but you get the gist of it

[Bib]

I did not have that much pure faith, which is a sin of course. I had to investigate all the documentation and evidence of Christ, and come to well thought out conclusions.

Writing came into common use about 4300 years ago. Up until then, the majority of Genesis was passed along, mainly by word of mouth. By the time of Christ, the ability to keep an, at least semi-permanent record, was possible.

IMO, this record has been passed down, and translated, fairly accurately for this relatively small amount of time. There are small, relatively insignificant glitches in the record. But much of the history recorded can be cross-referenced in other documentation. There is enough evidence for me to believe anyway. But you have to do a lot of research to find the evidence.

Bigger

[iwant8inches]

Presently, I think too much of what is intended to be based upon belief or faith is actually based on what we know or what we are told. This places doubt in our minds. There could be something that is found tomorrow that we had no idea existed that absolutely proves or disproves the existence of God, but whether or not that will ever happen doesn't matter. It's what you place faith in that matters not where denial meets undeniable proof. Everything that's been said has been said before and everything that was or is exists in this world because we know it exists. So while I find it hard to believe that we are something special to the degree of being the creation of the divine I still think that since we do exist everything else does therefore without us there is nothing capable of "realizing" or "knowing" the things of the world and universe. So in that we Are special or unique. I do think that the human race can end by its own accord however, which makes me wonder about the reasoning behind our existence more than how we came to be. Anyway, I don't know about the belief in Christ. I think he is my Lord and savior, but I don't exactly know why. I guess I have my doubts, but again it's because I want more than enough proof. Other than that I believe in one God and it's because of all the things that we do not know yet. Every year more discoveries are made and even while we don't necessarily understand more every year that doesn't mean that day we are shown the truth will not come. (I think that was about the most understandable triple negative ever written. hahaha)

[Stuff_]

Jesus was the Son of God. That does not mean he is God, though. Jesus stated many times over that he is not God, but rather that he is in a relationship (which requires two people) with God in the mood of a loving servant. That Jesus was God's only son does not make sense to me, if God didn't create me and everyone else, who did? Jesus was shaktivesa avatar, or an incarnation of the energy of God, just like Buddha was. Buddha was the 9th avatar of Vishnu. Jesus came, like many others, to show us how to engage in a pure loving relationship with God. That in no way implies that he is God, though. Jesus is guru, though, so if you serve and love him purely, he will bring you to God. And there is only one God; Jesus was His pure devotee, His pure servant simply carrying out His orders. Also there was writing in Sanskrit since time immemorial, and there are Sanskrit documents which date over 5200 years ago called the Vedas, from which many religions have sprung.

[REDZULU2003]

Jesus is a holy martar for god, he's like a soldier of god.
He died for something he belived in.
Hey I aint a bible basher, but I belive in jesus and god.
I dont think that jesus is the BIG picture like the church might paint, he IMHO is just a martar or holy warrier god sent to make a point. GOD Is the PICTURE and he IS again IMHO the UNIVERSE, god iseverywhere and I belive our very life paths have some influence on them from god. I dont think we have a set path that has been laid, but bestway to describe what I mean is we [some] have tendencys to have certain things happen more than others, or prone to it more than others. Some get more bad luck, some more good etc etc and I belive some has a role with GOD....NOT JESUS but god.
The supernatural is the gateway to that world, I have touched the otherside and I belive more than ever that death is just the start of life. I sometimes thank the lord, ask him for strength....I wear a celtic silver and celtic gold cross.....I have faith, albeit I dont preach it. Wouldnt mind myseld getting more into the bible, but I dont wonna get so into it that I know it verse for verse. Again to answer the thread, incase my answer got lost - Christ is a martar of god, a holy warrier sent by him to make a point...to fight and strive for what was right. Just what I think.

[samzman]

u have touched the other side? you mean near death or just a perpetual state of in and out? i know as an epileptic, after a while it becomes like you're alive and you're dead. going into a seizure for me is like death, i fear it like nothing else. infact i fear seizures so much that i have almost for fear for death itself. since i was little i was knockin at deaths door, had viral meningitis when i was 6 months and since then i've been gettin better and worse. didnt' mean to dump my whole personal story in there. just puting it together in my head that all the shit i went through, faith in somethin more was the only thing that helped me through a lot.....now kittie is my main rock of strength for these tough times. in many ways she's my "angel" when i'm in and out and knockin on..to me...deaths door.

[VladtheImpaler]

He is the thing I got turned off of by stereotypical christian types like yourself millionman, im not bashin you either, Im just saying if religion wants to live in the 21st century, you gotta change your ways cuz I think christians are as crazy as those islamists......
Again, what happens to a good person who DO NOT praise the lord on high when they die????

Im spiritual, religion starts wars, if your religious your on the wrong side.....

[TomdW]

I believe jesus to have been a semi or fully enlightened being. Either way he must have been quite remarkable for us to be talking about him this long after his death.

[gonnabe2huge]

Maybe Jesus lived, maybe he didn't who really knows. To me faith is just a way for us to control the youth and condem and avoid the "freaks", i used to be a super christian, then i realized we were all full of bs. From what i learned in the bible, most christians (most, not all) aren't doing christianity right (although its all up to be deciphered by each individual). I like buddhism, much less bs, and it actually helps in daily life(christianity did jack for me).

[9cyclops9]

I'll say my thoughts and be done with the thread, because stuff like this always turns into a huge long thread of "us versus them," and it shouldn't be that way.

I believe Jesus is the Son of God, in the Christian sense. That He died for the sins of the world, etc.

I don't think millionman intended this thread to be about "religion" per se, and I see it turning into that already, and there have been some pretty dogmatic and completely unfounded statements already. Believe me, I'd love to debate theology, it's one of my favorite things to do, and I could do it until I'm blue in the face. But the truth is, some of you anti-Christians are way more closed-minded than you may think we Christians are. No amount of fact, historical records, philosophical debate or anything else will convince you otherwise because you won't even allow the thought into your brain. And I find it a huge waste of my time and anyone else's to debate this on a public forum, because as always, one side will gang up on the other side and the thread will get locked or trashed because people can't keep to the original spirit of the thread and simply state their views and let it rest.

But as always, I'm open to talk to ANYONE on this forum about my theological/philosophical/religious views, whether you just want to know what I believe, or if you're trying to prove me wrong or any other reason. I welcome it. PM me and we'll set a date for a one-on-one chat on AIM. Because I love sharing my views with people and seeing what they believe also. Also, I'm not here to force my beliefs down anyone's throat, so rest assured if we chat on AIM I won't be trying to convert you. :D

Back to the thread.

[German Stallion]

Actually there is more proof for the Jesus Christ and his resurrection than there is for any other fact of history. You just have to look and analyze. Not only was Jesus Christ a man but he was a sinless man and died for the sins of the whole world. He was the accepted substitute for all of us. We have a choice to accept or reject his offering of a pure and sinless life. Believing or not believing does not take away facts. The Bible, while it is a book of antiquity, and has been translated and copied is still a remarkable book in that it still retains all its integrity. Recent finds in archeology are in almost total agreement with present copies or translations. God has preserved HIS Word as he said he would do and we have it in the Bible. While many would disagree with this, that does not take away the facts or truth. I find it interesting that there are so many on this forum who do have a great understanding of the Christ and God and many who have believed in Christ as their personal Saviour. I also find it interesting that many don't and those who don't are often adamant and antagonistic toward those who do. I am a believer in Christ, have made him my personal Saviour and have great love for the Lord and the things of the Lord. It is a personal choice and those who don't believe like I/we do have that choice. It further makes we wonder why the attack on those who believe by those who don't believe. It seems there needs to be an exchange of thoughts with openness. It is a simple thing really, if you are thirsty and want to drink of the water in my well, help yourself. If you don't, get your own water from your well. I have found my water sweet and refreshing and very, very good. If your water is that way, then enjoy it. If it isn't I still invite you to share my water. I don't chose to drink from your well, as I have tasted some water from other wells and it was not so good. Back to Jesus Christ, he claimed he was God and so far no-one has proved him wrong. But then not everyone is done trying, but if things keep going the way they are, He is still God and still right and still living..at least He is in my heart. Thanks for listening. GS

[Wurkz2hard]

GS, Red, et al:

I highly respect your right to believe and have faith in your beliefs. I just wanted to get across (and feel I didn't adequately) that there is so much in this world touted as "the truth" whether written or oral form that later turns out to be anything but.

I just find it very very difficult to believe that such an ancient text that has undergone so many translations and modifications (a good example, the "version" of the Bible that the JW's have where it's been proven that they've modified passages to suit their own end. Perhaps not the best example, but one nonetheless) could be anything but the collective agenda of thousands of years of control and enslavement.

It's not that I bear any animosity to anyone who has faith in God or religion in general, I in fact am spiritual but not religious. The Bible to me is just a tool organized religions use to ensure their flocks are kept in line.

Indoctrination in a doctrine that served its purpose in bringing order to a chaotic time but in the modern era nothing more then a quaint notion which still enslaves minds (there is no spoon...)

I guess my problem is not so much that people believe in God (or Jesus) but rather they take the Bible at face value and those who are members of organized religion which causes more harm then good (most organized religions, hell any organized organization such as Teamsters or The Mob, what have you.) Anytime you have one or a select group of people dictating to the masses saying this is right or that is wrong gives me cause for great concern.

Just my two-cents + tax.

[German Stallion]

Hi. I respect your honest opinions and appreciate your comments. That is what this forum stuff is about, being able to talk and discuss, and still maintain some kindness. That is often hard to show on paper or in a chat forum! If I come on too strong, then take it and chew it and realize I don't mean it harshly. So, having said that...


GS, Red, et al:

I highly respect your right to believe and have faith in your beliefs. I just wanted to get across (and feel I didn't adequately) that there is so much in this world touted as "the truth" whether written or oral form that later turns out to be anything but.

Real truth, can stand any test it is put to it. AS you said, some things are put out as truth but are not. Any test that you put truth to, it must come out correct. If it has errors, then it fails. But, just because someone says some part of the Bible is wrong without carrying through on the reason they
believe it, does not make it so. I deal every week with people who make statements about the Bible but have no facts to back up their attacks about the Bible. They read it someplace and took it as face value.

I just find it very very difficult to believe that such an ancient text that has undergone so many translations and modifications (a good example, the "version" of the Bible that the JW's have where it's been proven that they've modified passages to suit their own end. Perhaps not the best example, but one nonetheless) could be anything but the collective agenda of thousands of years of control and enslavement.

Okay, I understand what you are saying, but the ancient text that you are talking about is not just any book and it has had some very, very careful scrutinizing in its history. When copies were made of the Hebrew texts, there were certain rules that prevented mistakes from being made. About translations, that is another matter. Some translations are not good and have to be accepted as that. Some translations, so called, are not translations but rather paraphrases. Others have gross inaccuracies as you pointed out...the JW's translation is in error, to prove their doctrine and "suit their own end." Good scholarship quickly reveals this and it takes some work to ascertain which translations are good and which are not. Often there is an underlying motive behind the translation. When you investigate a translation you often find what is behind the reason it was developed. Money is often the cause for a translation so we have to take that into consideration too. Having said all that, I still have a great confidence in the Bible. I reject some translatoins and accept others. If you or anyone else is really serious, they can find a good translation and read it with confidence. Certianly you would not read the JW one, because it is slanted. So, which ones are not slanted, you will have to do some home work to work on that. Up until the early 1900's most any translation was accurate in the english language and you could trust it. With the proliferation of new translations, and copyrights and "money" you just need to work hard on investigation.

I have a couple years of Greek under my belt so can deal with the Greek text of the NT, but there is so much written from accurate sources that you can learn what you want with some study. The Hebrew text has had little if anything done to it, so it is very accurate. When the dead sea scrolls were found, they were so close to the translations we have it was uncanny.

It's not that I bear any animosity to anyone who has faith in God or religion in general, I in fact am spiritual but not religious. The Bible to me is just a tool organized religions use to ensure their flocks are kept in line.

I like that term, Spiritual and not religious. So often the religious are more tradition and organization than spiritual. Wrong, about the Bible used as a tool to ensure their flocks are kept in line...most of those who want to keep their flocks in line, don't use the Bible, or if they do, they twist and pervert what they want. One of the rules of Bible investigation or proper bible interpretation is "context." Anything can be proven if you take it out of context, bible or any document. Unfortunately, many rip the verse out of the bible as a proof text for their position and ignore the accurate context of the Bible.

Indoctrination in a doctrine that served its purpose in bringing order to a chaotic time but in the modern era nothing more then a quaint notion which still enslaves minds (there is no spoon...)

I don't know what you mean by that...There are many doctrines taught by some "churches" that are not taught in any bible verse or context. They may try and teach something from a Bible text but it stretches any text to prove it. Example. The Catholic doctrine of Purgatory...no bible context to even begin to prove it. Same with confession, so called. Also, no bible context to prove Mormon "baptism for the dead." These are just a few examples of the twisting of scriptures by some to prove what they want. But, we don't throw out the bible because of someone trying to prove their position by wrongly using it. Neither do we quit using some medicine or drug when someone had a reaction or didn't use it rightly.

I guess my problem is not so much that people believe in God (or Jesus) but rather they take the Bible at face value and those who are members of organized religion which causes more harm then good (most organized religions, hell any organized organization such as Teamsters or The Mob, what have you.) Anytime you have one or a select group of people dictating to the masses saying this is right or that is wrong gives me cause for great concern.

I can't disagree...organized religion, so called often has people in control. Again, I know many who are hanging on to their church or works or what they do, as their church teaches, but often....that teaching is not bible nor does the Bible give any support to these teachings. I could give you many examples; but this has become a long post. Thanks for listening. GS
Just my two-cents + tax.

[Wurkz2hard]

Cool brother.

[millionman]

Bump......I'll be making my reply to this with links to informatino regarding the church and it's instituionalization, and it does not represent the church seen in the book of Acts. As well as presenting scripture to show Christ not only as GOD but also to show the reality that the Gospel is not a figment of someone's imagination. I am also going to present the difference between FAITH and simple belief.

[philadelph]

J.c.

[Kraft]

presenting scripture to show Christ not only as GOD but also to show the reality that the Gospel is not a figment of someone's imagination. I am also going to present the difference between FAITH and simple belief.

So, you are going to use scripture to prove things it contains? Sounds like a rather circular argument if so.

[Stuff_]

Jesus said many times that he is not God, that he is servant of God, subbordinate to God, come to deliver God's message to us. Jesus is the son of God, but disticntly not God Himself, he even said so many times.

[German Stallion]

Jesus said many times that he is not God, that he is servant of God, subbordinate to God, come to deliver God's message to us. Jesus is the son of God, but disticntly not God Himself, he even said so many times.

I disagree with you Stuff. So, tell me where he said he was not God and where he said it many times? GS

[Stuff_]

He said it in many places, I'll qoute just a few for example here, but there's more than just this.

For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, He gave me a command, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that His command is life everlasting: therefore I speak, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.
(John 12:49-50)

But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.
(John 14:31)

In the two verses above, God commands Jesus. If Jesus was God, nobody could command him. Moreover, Jesus says that he loves God. Love necessarily requires two parties; the lover and the beloved.


Now, don't get me wrong here, I love both Jesus and his Father, God more than anything else in existance. But there is only One God, and He is the Father; no one is equal to or above Him. Jesus has a very intimate Father-son relationship with God, and he is purely serving God. Jesus came to teach us of this love, that we might love his Father as well.

[9cyclops9]

I see where you're coming from, Stuff_, but I have to point something else out earlier in the Book of John.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

Skip a bit.

14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as og the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John bore witness of Him, and cried out, saying, "This is He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'" (John 1:1-3, 14 NASB)

Also if you check it out thoroughly in the original Greek, it makes much more sense. It's a very key passage in most Christian doctrines, and it's much easier to understand why if you look up the Greek meaning, because it goes much deeper than what we see translated.

Much of the meaning and original feeling of the Bible is "lost in translation." I'd recommend a "Keyword Study Bible" that you can probably get at any Christian (or other) bookstore. I think they come in several different translations. It has many of the words catalogued so you can look up their original Greek, Aramaic (for the 1 or 2 passages that were spoken in Aramaic) or Hebrew meaning. It's extremely helpful in understanding exactly what is meant, especially in some places where the meaning may be unclear.

[stillwantmore]

I believe the man existed, and lived. I believe he lived, and died to prove a point. I dont believe however, that he was as unique of a figure as most Christians paint him out to be. Too many other religions have a similar figure who lived a similar type of life for similar symbolic reasons...whose stories originated LONG before the Christain story of Jesus. Astrology, if you want to make it a religion used the sun as the center figure, with the twelve signs of the zodiac (see 12 deciples of christ) just to name one.

[millionman]

Hey Still if he was a man who died to prove a point what was the point??? What would his message accomplish if he died???

I've discussed the other religions that have similar stories before and they do not originate from the ancients, majority of the stories included under that heading arose during the time of the first century church as to compete with the growing numbers of the Discliples churches. The Zodiac is an established occultic religion that does center around the 12 symbols, but this in no way accompanies the 12 disciples....the number comparison can not be made between two completely different religions as they are associated with a different template, so the meanings are on opposite sides.

[millionman]

Joh 10:30 I and the Father are one."

Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you such a long time, and do you not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father. How do you say, 'Show us the Father?

Joh 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me; or else believe me for the very works' sake.

Jesus and God are one as we are made one with Christ, there is no difference in the two. The identification of Father is reality of who Christ was, He was the Son, God incarnate, Alpha and Omega. Otherwise the first verse of John is wrong or he was mistaken as to what the comforter was telling him.
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made.

Joh 14:26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and will remind you of all that I said to you.

In this verse you see the three are one, and all originate from the same source, being God the Father, but they are both given authority in the Father's name, another distinction of sameness and oneness.

(Joh 15:13) Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.
(Joh 15:14) You are my friends, if you do whatever I command you.
(Joh 15:15) No longer do I call you servants, for the servant doesn't know what his lord does. But I have called you friends, for everything that I heard from my Father, I have made known to you.
(Rom 10:8) But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth, and in your heart;" that is, the word of faith, which we preach:
(Rom 10:9) that if you will confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
(Rom 10:10) For with the heart, one believes unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

These verses together, illustrate that it is not by works, by religious piety, or self-inflicition but by grace alone are we saved through Christ. Christ laid down all He had for His sheep, for the world. He did not lay out any claims as to what necessitated salvation, but Paul makes it clear that it is by belief in the heart and confession of the mouth that salvation is received, and this is the only way. Anyone who tells you any other way should not be received but to be rebuked over their false "truth".

1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts; and always be ready to give an answer to everyone who asks you a reason concerning the hope that is in you, with humility and fear:

This last verse is a requirement of the brethren to those who exist in darkness and live separated from the Lord. We must stand ready and able to answer all questions of the Truth. Peace to all, and that peace can only reside in the one whom God sent as sacrifice for the sins of the world.

[millionman]

A link to a bit of church history... and the institutionalization of Christianity....

http://p203.ezboard.com/fherbsdiscussionboardfrm43.showMessage?topicID=405 .topic

[Priapologist]

Chirst? Isn't that something that you spread on toast?

Oh, OH! You mean Christ... I see, Jesus of Nazareth.

Yep :)

Well, I believe that Jesus Christ was born about 2000 years ago and was killed by the Jews and Romans 32 years later. I have faith that Jesus Christ was the literal incarnation of God on Earth. I have faith that the sacrifice of Christ absolved my Earthly stain (which is good, because it's awfully big). As for the "immutable truth" of the Bible... sorry, cannot be proven and it doen't affect my faith. As for the "immutable truth" of Creation (versus the credible theory of Evolution)... sorry, cannot be proven and it doesn't affect my faith. As for the "absolute truth" of God and Christ being the sole route to salvation... sorry, cannot be proven and it doesn't affect my faith.
I am a spiritual man. I have faith. I have no need for religious ceremony to bolster my faith (I attend church, nonetheless). I have no need to share my faith with anyone, unless they ask. I am a moral individual, but I am also a human man.

Cheers!
G

[dafatguy]

No dis or anything but check the myths of mithras, prometheus,osiris,dionysus and of course bacchus.Also Joeseph campbell's the power of myth.The dying god formula is very old and valid to an extant with all of them.Hope this can help flesh out the detals maybe in a more gnostic fashion?

[millionman]

What's interesting to me is that you site myths. I've read the myths, and many of them arose in the third century, along with insitutionalized "christianity". If you have ever read the Gospels, these myths have absolutely no bearing on the reality of Christ. Historically it is proven externally by Josephus the first century ROMAN historian that a man named Jesus of Nazareth was associated with John the Baptist, and was believed by many to be the Christ. So there is historical proof for his existence, along with physical proof of his existence which is shown through the archaeological digs that have been done in the last 50-75 years of the areas surrounding Israel, as well as locations in Rome and other areas. So which is more likely, that this evidence is made up, or that it is as scripture says "1Jo 4:6 We are of God. He who knows God listens to us. He who is not of God doesn't listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error."

Joh 18:20 Jesus answered him, "I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues, and in the temple, where the Jews always meet. I said nothing in secret.

If these events can be vouched for throughout history, and the people who were in power during the day knew these events to be false, then why would they ever let people under their authority be manipulated and taken from them. It would not have been allowed, they would have stepped forward and proclaimed the truth to all, that their Christ was not arisen but that He never passed away. But they did not do this, as it is exactly as is written.

Does anyone not understand that the reality is that Luke is accepted as a first rate historian, that the academic institutions accept the four Gospels as 99.9% historically accurate. Why would secular universities and scholars accept such documents as fact if they alas are not? This in itself is rediculous, as through any method tested these documents are supported in their original languages as written because of the number of documents to support their aaccuracy. The KJV is accepted worldwide as the primary english translation because of the care that was taken in translating from greek/latin/hebrew that it's writers can stand side by side with the original translators' academic approach to the transcription process.

Do some research on these documents and how they were written originally and then how they have come to be to us today. You will discover that any questions of authenticity are falls flat on it's face.

[AcesHigh]

All I have to say is this

There have been Satanic Rites, Inverted crosses in blood, the good side isn't really better, man will never realize that religion is created by man.

[millionman]

Aces...You have to understand one very important fact, to exist in the Life of Christ is not religion. It is the farthest thing from religion. What people deem as the "church" is religion, it is a system that is setup so that people will continue to lead and to follow a man of "god" and they will br trapped in a system that in all aspects takes away their humanity as they become more and more entrenched in the "gospel" of whatever church they are residing in. The term eklesia is where the translated word church comes from, and an eklesia is a gathering of people. This could be anyone from the stanists, new agers, masons etc. These would all be considered eklesisa's but no one would call it a church, far from it. So the reality is that yes man creates religion, but Jesus Christ does not seek to bind anyone unto Himself, but to offer freedom in Him so that we may have LIFE everlasting. What churches preach and point to is a system that does not offer Life, but offers motions and actions to make you redeemable to the Father, but also so that you would have the "proper" appearance. This does not invite unity, but division and this is the furthest thing from how brothers and sisters should live.

Matthew 23:8-10 (AMP)
But you are not to be called rabbi (teacher), for you have one Teacher and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone [in the church] on earth father, for you have one Father, Who is in heaven. And you must not be called masters (leaders), for you have one Master (Leader), the Christ.

[DiGenius]

why do you spend your time obsessing over this.........you will NEVER know. No one is ever going to KNOW what happens after you die. Man has been trying to figure it out and explain the unknown since the beggining of civilization. And what have we gotten to.....a way of comforting people into believing they will NEVER die....thus ETERNAL LIFE. Don't you realize people have been trying to sell this for millenia that there is a way to avoid death. There is no way.....you have been born to die, it is your fate...come to grips with it and enjoy the time you have alive. Do not obssess over what may or may not happen after you die. Seize today and enjoy it. And if you need that security that a just god will take you into his arms and accept you as his own, LIVE A MORAL LIFE and call it a day. There is no need for ornate ceremonies every week and bible conventions and posts that just develop the same arguments over and over again.

[Kal-el]

I do not beleive in a "supernatural" or "divine" entity, however, I do beleive in a supreme being. The earth is too complicated to come about without an intelligent designer. I beleive wholehardedly in Christ, I think he is the way, and whoever hears the truth, hears his voice, and the only way to the father, is through him. I think Jesus was a regular flesh and blood human being, he sweated, he bled, he cried; and I think the "miracles" he performed, were just the use of scientific teachings from our creator/s. For more visit www.rael.org. I dont mean to offend anyone, its just another perspective

[Swank]

Alright, a UFO cult finally shows up! Now I'm just waiting for a scientologist (although they're into aliens as well) to chip in.

To me any religion is equally far fetched as many of the prominent cults anways. They spend so much time trying to justify themselves and trying to somehow prove they're version of things has a leg up on all the others. If you have so much faith, why bother? As far as the god figure/sacrifice stories, a few weeks back I saw an entire special on television about the pheonomena. There are similar figures to Christ in religions and cultures that predate Christianity and Christ by centuries according to the show, which I thought was rather even handed. Hard to argue with the archeological record. It also explained that ther were even multiple Christ-like messiah guys roaming around the middle east at the time of Christ that had their own personal cults and following just like Jesus. They all proclaimed to be a form of salvation, performed miracles, arrived from miraculous conception, ect, all clearly recorded form surviving documents. Perhaps they'll rebroadcast it sometime . . .

[Priapologist]

Now Swank... just because you're the smartest guy on the whole fucking forum and have all the right answers doesn't mean you have to lord it over everyone else. Come on, the guy's a Newbie! Besides, if you're not careful, he may instruct Rael's flying saucers to melt your brain :D


My, my, I do love sarcasm.

[Swank]

Have you ever read about those guys, or the scientologists for that matter? Personally I think the whole cult mentalilty thing is kind of fascinating, in a really troubling way . . .

[Kal-el]

In all reality guys its not a cult. How can it be a cult if it branches out from all the main religions?

[Swank]

Ah well, I don't mean to pick on you. In all the outside literature I've read about the organization it is described as a cult, so I guess that all depends on just what your definition is. To be honest I find what you believe in to be just as unlikely as Christianity, Islam, or any other religious group, so more power to you if it makes you happy. But, uh, head for the door if they start handing out kool-aid or anything . . .

[millionman]

Has anyone not read what I have said as far as the "christian" religion? Matthew 23:8-10
Mat 23:8 But don't you be called 'Rabbi,' for one is your teacher, the Christ, and all of you are brothers.
Mat 23:9 Call no man on the earth your father, for one is your Father, he who is in heaven.
Mat 23:10 Neither be called masters, for one is your master, the Christ. Mat 23:11 But he who is greatest among you will be your servant.
Mat 23:12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
Mat 23:13 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows' houses, and as a pretense you make long prayers. Therefore you will receive greater condemnation.
Mat 23:14 "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men; for you don't enter in yourselves, neither do you allow those who are entering in to enter.
Mat 23:15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel around by sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much of a son of Gehenna as yourselves.

In this Christ is speaking to the religious leaders of the day, as they set themselves above everyone else as "righteous" and "holy" as they were keepers of the law. This is the same institution that can currently be seen in the "church". My point is that Jesus would have dealt with our current "leaders" as he dealt with the pharisees. These people are keeping people from living the LIFE that Christ gives that we would not be shackled to the laws of religion and the rituals of man but free in Him.

Swank, you seem to have an idea of which you speak, but it is clear that you do not have any idea because if you had any clue as to which truth you are speaking to then you would in no way put islam and christianity (as ministered to in the New Testament not the current "religion" they are two different realities) in the same sentence or context. One is based on villance and hatred for anyone opposed to their view, while the other only seeks to unburden men and to share the LOVE of our Father in Heaven. There is such a stark contrast between the two that you can not mention them in the same general context because of the drastic contrast in their core beliefs. As for any other discussion of Faith I would gladly meet you on it and discuss it openly. As for anyone else who would like to know more about Jesus with questions or anything that may come to mind feel free to post. If you have had a bad experience with the "church" or have had issues with people who called themselves "christian" we can talk about that too. Whatever needs to be brought into the light let it be brought and shown here in this thread. Everyone is welcome.

[TomdW]

I believe that it is good to debate these things but when people think that they know for certain the way things are is when trouble starts. In my opinion it is impossible to know the truth for certain. Instead it is much better to believe i.e. have faith.

It is impossible to prove whether or not God exists, physically or logically. Those that choose to believe in God or not must do so with an open mind. Many wars and many problems in society have been created by those that are certain that they know. It is when two groups of people that both believe that they 'know' meet that problems arise.

It is important for atheists to understand that it is impossible to disprove the existence of God just as it is impossible to prove His existence.

Personally I have read a lot of philosophy from David Hume to Taoism and my conclusion is that the more we understand that we know nothing the more we really know. Then it is possible to believe what we choose, but always appreciating that it is not definite.

The most important thing for the future is tolerance and morality. As a human race we need to embrace each other and our individual beliefs. We need to do what is right. I believe that when we do something immoral either for our own apparent gain or in the name of some grossly misunderstood scripture, we go against nature or God's will, if you want to see it that way.

Finally, we need to understand that on a very deep level we are all of one consciousness and that when we harm others we also harm ourselves and everyone else, including all animals insects and even life on other planets (if there is any). In other words all of God's creatures.

So I am not an atheist but equally not religious. I believe that it is not possible to know whether there is a God or not. I am of the 'don't know' mind.

Tom out. :)

[Swank]

tomdw: you shoud look into agnosticism. It fits your statements quite nicely. Forgive me if you've already investigated the ideas on your own, that was just the general tone I sensed from your post.

As far as me putting Islam and Christianity in the same arena . . . well they are based on the same essential texts and ideas. Chrsitianity itself is widely divided in terms of interpritation and understanding between various sects and individuals. All the same, they do spring from the same idea of a monotheistic concept and dirive their ideas from similar texts. The difference is in personal interpriation of different segments of scripture, but the basic faith is overshelmingly similar. It is my understanding that for the great majority of Muslims, their faith dicates a life of peace and and tolerance, not contradictorary to the basic teachings of Christ (check out the autobiography of Malcom X)

It is my belief that religion, either on the small cult level, or the major 'mainstream' world of belief, is simply a surrender of logic and rationality. Any religion is essentially bolstered by an unquestioning faith in a supernatual entity that controls the fate of all activities on earth. I personally find this to be totally unsupported by everthing that we have learned about the natual world through emperical testing and precise, logical analysis. Religion constantly battles the overwhelmingly solid conclusions of scinece and investigation, always, in my opinion, coming up gaspingly short of any substantial responce. Cold as it may seem, I think people com to believe in relgion because of misguided personal factors and a lack of understanding about science and logical ractionality. All the same, I don't think religion is harmful, but at the same time I give it essentially no credit. the same criteria that people place on beliveing in Jesus as the one true god is the same level of faith that they apply to believing that man was created by space aliens. Only the rhectoric and financial means shift from one argument to another.

Science and rationality simply exist on their own terms - religion and blind belief constantly struggle to remain realistic in the face of provable and observable actions. Anybody that thinks that their particular system of faith (there are thousands of religions recored and currently practiced) is holding their world view in nothing but a leap of pure faith in stories which they have been told by other men. Religion is nothing but an irrational and unsupported belief in things that make no sense and cannot be proved. I'm sorry if that offends some, but from where I'm standing it's an entirely accurate assesment.

[Priapologist]

But, uh, head for the door if they start handing out kool-aid or anything . . .

LOL!
Swank, you remind me a lot of me. Have you ever taken the Myers-Briggs test?

[Priapologist]

It is my belief that religion...is simply a surrender of logic and rationality.

That is why it's called faith, my friend.

[Priapologist]

Swank, you seem to have an idea of which you speak, but it is clear that you do not have any idea because if you had any clue as to which truth you are speaking to then you would in no way put islam and christianity (as ministered to in the New Testament not the current "religion" they are two different realities) in the same sentence or context. One is based on villance and hatred for anyone opposed to their view, while the other only seeks to unburden men and to share the LOVE of our Father in Heaven. There is such a stark contrast between the two that you can not mention them in the same general context because of the drastic contrast in their core beliefs.

Hey millionman, before you start spanking Swank, I think that you'd better check your "facts" about Islam. You're spouting a bunch of vitriol and, ahem, bullshit, frankly. Perhaps you should try reading the Holy Qur'an (http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/) before you pass judgement on Islam. But first, chew on this: God = Allah = YHWH. They're the same god, brother.

Peace!

[Racin77db]

Hey millionman what do you think of the theory of the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene?

[millionman]

My friend if you had any clue as to what the symbols of Islam mean and what they are connected to and what god they worship isn't a god it is satan. If you doubt it then you my friend should do a bit of study on the topic. For you to say that allah=yahweh is not true on any level, and I know this for a fact. Regardless of what you may think or how your "logical" mind may work it is obvious that they do not serve the same God as we do because of the call to violence in their word, and they are RELIGION not faith. Mandatory prayer everyday towards mecca (which if you do research on was where the ancients had their rituals and human sacrifices), as well as the mandatory chants etc. As far as chanting goes it is always associated with satan worship not what El Shaddei. Again I point out the fact that FAITH is not religion at all, walking with Christ is not a sysytem of rules or even moral standards. It is Life, as it is not something that you decide to do because in Galatians Paul admonishes the church by saying you have begun in the Spirit and now are attempting to complete these works in the flesh. It is spiritual life not fleshly life, and all things in us are not accomplished according to man's sight or man's rules but according to Yeshua. This does not call for some religious system but for a walking and action Faith, by action I do not simply mean behavior as how you should or should not do, but as to what Yahweh reveals and calls us to.

If this Faith were made up then why whould it include this exchange between Peter and Jesus?

Mat 16:15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
Mat 16:16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
Mat 16:17 Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
Mat 16:18 I also tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my assembly, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.
Mat 16:19 I will give to you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will have been bound in heaven; and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven."
Mat 16:20 Then he commanded the disciples that they should tell no one that he is Jesus the Christ.
Mat 16:21 From that time, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and the third day be raised up.
Mat 16:22 Peter took him aside, and began to rebuke him, saying, "Far be it from you, Lord! This will never be done to you."
Mat 16:23 But he turned, and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me, for you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of men."
Mat 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone desires to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Mat 16:25 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, and whoever will lose his life for my sake will find it.
Mat 16:26 For what will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, and forfeits his life? Or what will a man give in exchange for his life?
Mat 16:27 For the Son of Man will come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will render to everyone according to his deeds.

In the above passages not only does Jesus bless Peter and speak to him about being the one to establish the Body on the Earth, but only a few moments later rebukes him by saying away from me satan. For one of his disicples to be chastised in such a manner would not need to be put into a false gospel, but if it is true then this shows us our ability to be Spirit led and operating in His knowledge and not ours and it also shows our ineptitude at discerning our own deisres over the Father's will. The bottom of this passage is what you will not see the religious leaders and the sheep of these men do, they will have their posessions, their comfort, and their will over His. These are not fit to follow after Jesus as He says himself that if you are not willing to lay down your life for His life then you can not follow Him, it is quite clear.

As far as proving God's existence I think this article is a spot on example of how one would see God if they did not have their mind made up regardless of the evidence http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

For some info on Islam http://www.chick.com/information/religions/islam/

TOMDW, that is what the new agers want you to believe as well as the ecumenical movement of the current soon to be apostate church. It is pure drivel and God speaks clearly to that and says that Light and Darkness have nothing in common as that they can not dwell in the same body. It is also clear when Jesus said that I have come to divide brother from brother, son from father etc. He is not about unity in any way, outside of unity in Himself. The only way for their to be unity is for the religious to forget their religion and follow after Christ and Christ alone, and that is the Truth not as I see it but how it is in His Holy and Righteous Word.

[Swank]

Um, I thought Muslims and Christians and Jews all believed in the same god, just different texts and prophets. They certainly all spring form the same source. I can't keep up with all this textual interpritation minutia and such, but I'm pretty such sure that Muslims don't believe they're worshipping the devil, if I read that part correctly. Anyway I'm done with this as I've finally learned I'm not going to sway anybody's opinion on the nature of the universe by posting on an internet forum . . .

If faith makes you happy, then embrace it. If not having faith makes you happy, you can come drink a beer with me. Faith guys can come to, but you're buying, and nobody gets to talk about god.

[Priapologist]

Um, I thought Muslims and Christians and Jews all believed in the same god, just different texts and prophets. They certainly all spring form the same source. I can't keep up with all this textual interpritation minutia and such, but I'm pretty such sure that Muslims don't believe they're worshipping the devil, if I read that part correctly. Anyway I'm done with this as I've finally learned I'm not going to sway anybody's opinion on the nature of the universe by posting on an internet forum . . .

If faith makes you happy, then embrace it. If not having faith makes you happy, you can come drink a beer with me. Faith guys can come to, but you're buying, and nobody gets to talk about god.

LOL! Spot on.

Millionman, brother, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you're views are so messed up that I can't even begin to tell you how wrong you are. Sorry.

So, Swank, do you like stout?

Peace

[AcesHigh]

Aces...You have to understand one very important fact,
No I don't. I fucking hate anything to do with jesus or judiasm. Jesus was a racist.

[millionman]

So instead of regarding the informatino presented you merely bruch it off and say I'm not changing my mind so I'm not going to continue in this discussion regardless of the information presented.
2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not listen to the sound doctrine, but, having itching ears, will heap up for themselves teachers after their own lusts;
2Ti 4:4 and will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside to fables.


Paul's defense to the court of Festus
Act 26:22 Having therefore obtained the help that is from God, I stand to this day testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would happen,
Act 26:23 how the Christ must suffer, and how, by the resurrection of the dead, he would be first to proclaim light both to these people and to the Gentiles."
Act 26:24 As he thus made his defense, Festus said with a loud voice, "Paul, you are crazy! Your great learning is driving you insane!"
Act 26:25 But he said, "I am not crazy, most excellent Festus, but boldly declare words of truth and reasonableness.
Act 26:26 For the king knows of these things, to whom also I speak freely. For I am persuaded that none of these things is hidden from him, for this has not been done in a corner.
Act 26:27 King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe."
Act 26:28 Agrippa said to Paul, "With a little persuasion are you trying to make me a Christian?"
Act 26:29 Paul said, "I pray to God, that whether with little or with much, not only you, but also all that hear me this day, might become such as I am, except for these bonds."
Act 26:30 The king rose up with the governor, and Bernice, and those who sat with them.
Act 26:31 When they had withdrawn, they spoke one to another, saying, "This man does nothing worthy of death or of bonds."
Act 26:32 Agrippa said to Festus, "This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar."

Prophetic word of our current day and the manner in which we live as well as to the religious leaders of this current day having turned from sound doctrine to foolishness, be ye not deceived by false prophets.
Rom 1:17 For in it is revealed God's righteousness from faith to faith. As it is written, "But the righteous shall live by faith."
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
Rom 1:19 because that which is known of God is revealed in them, for God revealed it to them.
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse.
Rom 1:21 Because, knowing God, they didn't glorify him as God, neither gave thanks, but became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and traded the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed animals, and creeping things.
Rom 1:24 Therefore God also gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves,
Rom 1:25 who exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this reason, God gave them up to vile passions. For their women changed the natural function into that which is against nature.
Rom 1:27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural function of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another, men doing what is inappropriate with men, and receiving in themselves the due penalty of their error.
Rom 1:28 Even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil habits, secret slanderers,
Rom 1:30 backbiters, hateful to God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, unforgiving, unmerciful;
Rom 1:32 who, knowing the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also approve of those who practice them.

Racin77db:
As far as Jesus being married there is no basis of this in or outside of Scripture. Peter is known to have been married and is written of in the Word, as marriage is a glorious event and Life in God's sight and that this is the primary image of Christ and His Love for His Bride. His Bride is the body of Christ, and this is the absolute reason that He would have never been married as it was not part of the Father's plan as His Bride still awaits the Bridegroom's return.

[AcesHigh]

I refused to read your post due to the lack of facts. You just turned to a page in the bible to justify what you cannot explain using the creative side of your mind. I do not believe in the bible, and am verbally violent against christian's that invade me. I never, never go around telling them the word of ODIN, because no one will give a shit. To them, paganism is silly. To me, chrisianity, mormanism, catholicism, etc. is all jewish paganism. I hate it.

I am a euro man, and I follow the same gods my ancestors did before christianity even existed. You are wasting your time by argueing with me, millionman.

In all honesty I respect you for trying to convert people, but you need to go easy. If you were in my house acting like that, I would take action....if you catch my drifter. When the people of god invaded scandinavia, we gave you hell. You lit us on fire, burning high at the stakes with the love of christ were the people of ODIN. I am still standing here, centuries have passed, mighty were the fathers of the norsemen....and in myself, they have returned. I am a fucking Viking, and no man of god will change my ways.

[millionman]

No I don't. I fucking hate anything to do with jesus or judiasm. Jesus was a racist.

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to promise.

Jesus was Jewish as to fulfill the Prophecy's in regards to Him and his existence. He was not jewish to separate anyone, and the Apostle Paul makes that quite clear as seen in the above text from Galatians 3:28-29. Here is an instance of Peter speaking at the home of a gentile man and is proclaiming the Truth of no division between Jew and Gentile:


Act 10:34 Peter opened his mouth and said, "Truly I perceive that God doesn't show favoritism;
Act 10:35 but in every nation he who fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.
Act 10:36 The word which he sent to the children of Israel, preaching good news of peace by Jesus Christ-he is Lord of all-
Act 10:37 that spoken word you yourselves know, which was proclaimed throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
Act 10:38 even Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed him with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.
Act 10:39 We are witnesses of everything he did both in the country of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they also killed, hanging him on a tree.
Act 10:40 God raised him up the third day, and gave him to be revealed,
Act 10:41 not to all the people, but to witnesses who were chosen before by God, to us, who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.
Act 10:42 He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that this is he who is appointed by God as the Judge of the living and the dead.
Act 10:43 All the prophets testify about him, that through his name everyone who believes in him will receive remission of sins."
Act 10:44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell on all those who heard the word.
Act 10:45 They of the circumcision who believed were amazed, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was also poured out on the Gentiles.
Act 10:46 For they heard them speaking in other languages and magnifying God. Then Peter answered,
Act 10:47 "Can any man forbid the water, that these who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we should not be baptized?"
Act 10:48 He commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay some days.

We do not hate anyone; we are here to love and to annoint with oil. We are not here to condemn into Hell but to give the gift of Life through our Lord and savior Jesus Christ, that none should experience damnation but come to a saving Grace of Jesus Christ. Let all come and receive Him that they too would receive Life everlasting, and release from the bonds of this world and live freely.

[millionman]

Yes I turn to the SWORD of the Lord. I could use my mind to refute whatever comes up as an issue, as I understand the facts and can argue for them, but I choose to not venture of the Rock of the Lord which is Jesus Christ. I have read of Odin and the violvent nature of this pagan belief system, and you are wrong in believing that it were Christians who burned the norsemen. There were times of war between the norse and the english, also norsemen and other scandinavian people did battle throughout the years as well. As I understand it, the christians were the ones that were burned by the norsemen, not the other way around. If you are referring to the inquisition or the crusades these were not led by christians but by the Catholic regime that in no way represents the House of the Lord, and again you can learn about this by looking into their theology.

[Priapologist]

Millionman,

Really...do you realize how absurd you look right now? Some friendly advice: give it a rest. This is a Penis Enlargement website, not your bully pulpit.

God loves you man, be happy with that.

Peace
Pri

[Kal-el]

Jesus in his time contradicted everything that existed. He was trying to inaugurate a new way of living with the potential to put war and prejudice away completely. He replaced the old testament's "eye for an eye" with "love your enemy" , he let women minister along side him, and that was really radical considering at that time women were second class citizens. Jesus would without a doubt in my mind deal with these religious leaders today the exact same way he delt with the pharisses and saducees. I think the church is just society-sanctioned brainwashing, you dont have to bow down and worship a piece of wood to follow Jesus. A piece of wood in the shape of a cross means nothing. A cross is not the Christ. Over 10,000 criminals were crucified on crosses during Jesus' lifetime.

[millionman]

Priap, one question, who am I bullying? Do you feel bullied? You shouldn't, but my friend Truth is Truth. For many men on this website the point out many things about Christ but the question is do they know anything about Him other than what someone told them. I'm not telling them anything, that's why I am posting from the Word. I am not venturing into this is what I say or this is what I think, this is WHAT IS!!! There is a tremendous difference between speaking from a pulpit and speaking to men where they are. I am not elevating myself above anyone or proclaiming that I have some insight into the other realm that is earth shattering or so striking that someone would absolutely listen to me. I am presenting the Truth as it is, as it can be verified through the original texts of Greek and Hebrew that what I am posting are the words of the God-Man Jesus, and His Apostles and what they truly say vs. what the gathering together of what is known as "church" says as the truth. From what I have read from the men in this thread alone that many have never been told about Christ as He is, not as someone might think him to be or may perceive him to be.

I fully understand that this is a PE website, but in all honesty why would that bother me. Jesus hung out with tax-collectors, fisher men, liars, cheats, and thieves. So why would I not share the Truth on this website? There's nothing wrong with sharing on this website is there? Other people can post their beliefs, why shouldn't I? Am I limited because what I have to say burns men to their innermost being? Am I limited because these words carry weight and can change a man's life in an instant? Why should I be kept quiet, but everyone else has free reign? I can tell you why, it is because the name of Jesus Christ offends, the cross offends, and the offer of salvation offends, because it's hard. It's not an easy walk of Faith, it requires much but much was given so that I may have the chance to go before the Father, so that I may dwell in His heaven. I am fortunate enough to be able to say anything of the Lord, but I pray his blessings to all of you. Now why would anyone want me to be silenced, if they can gain eternal salvation but did not know how it was obtained? It costs nothing and is freely given. So why would someone not want something free that would change them inside and out, and turn everything upside down and inside out, that everything would become new and fresh. I've lived this, my world has been turned all kinds of ways and it has been the greatest time of my life and my friends it is so much better than I imagined, but it costs. It's not an easy road, but Christ has walked this path and that we walk with Him and give up ourselves so that He is Lord and releases us from the bondage of sin and shame, so that we can walk freely with no burdens of tomorrow or the next day, but everyday is brand new and having Faith in Him and His Life is a blessing to me and to all that would receive Him. That is the Truth, and I am living proof.

[koooky]

Well, I thought I would ad my nickels worth here...

I am agnostic. I believe the Bible for the most part to be written by a war-like tribe of
nomadic people. I do believe there is a "god", but not in the context that most religions would have you to believe.

kooky

[TomdW]

Millionman, You sound as if you are absolutely certain about all of these things. You sound as if you believe that there is no way that you could be wrong. You can justify this by quoting a book (the Bible) but I could quote a book that goes against everything that you say.

I realize that you believe that the Bible is sacred and is the truth but what if I had a book which I believed to be the same thing i.e the Koran. We would both be entirely sure that what we knew was the only truth and that the other was being unholy.

Then we would start to argue and because we were both sooo sure that we are right in the name of Allah or the Lord we would fight and kill each other. In doing so we would go against the precise message of both of the books that we have read and obviously misunderstood.

It is this arrogant, narrow minded attitude that has caused so many deaths in the past and I am sure will continue to.

I really hope that you can open your mind and try to understand that you have faith. Which in it's self is not at all a bad thing but it is faith and you cannot prove that you are right you can only believe it. It is important to understand that you could be wrong and therefore become a little more tolerant of other peoples opinions.

The real bad things that happen are death and suffering and most of them have come from wars which were carried out by people that misunderstood religion.

[philadelph]

Millionman, to say that Islam is based on violence and hatred for others is just plain ignorance. How many Muslims do you personally know?

[Bib]

million,

Preach on brother.

Million made an interesting thread, with the proper title, etc. Pretty good stuff, which brought in a lot of other posts. So what's wrong with that. It just appears to have made several guys uncomfortable. Discomfort can be good.

I actually did not read all of million's Bible sitings. I have read them all before, and know of what he writes. What is interesting to me is that the replies to million are all extremely predictable, given that the Bible lays out each of these 'points of view' in one place or another. IOW, not only does the Bible, especially Jesus' words, show the right way to live, but it also tells how men will twist things to avoid the word, or to ignore it. It has all been predicted. I find that interesting.

Bigger

[German Stallion]

Million...your posts are right on target. Most people who are so against Christ and the things of the Lord confuse "RELIGION" with knowing Christ. Facts about Bible and Truth are different than "Religion." GS

[German Stallion]

Millionman, to say that Islam is based on violence and hatred for others is just plain ignorance. How many Muslims do you personally know?

Million is correct. Have you read the Koran? Have you read the teaching of Islam? Doesn't matter how many we know, it is what we know about their belief. GS

[rafiki9]

Hi guys,

Let me preface this by saying that I am not going to mention my faith in this post... I am of a school that believes that your acts, not your words/quotations/affiliations show your true colors.

That being said, sadly, Million does not have an accurate handle on Islam. Why should he? He has a very strong faith in a brand of Christianity that puts a strong emphasis on conversion and testimony. By definition, genuine investigation into other faiths is prohibited. Very often, in our own spirituality, we have to choose to follow one path or another. Once you make that choice, HUMAN nature is to defend your position and to dismiss others. When you couple that with the directive to preach and "save" others, you end up with what we are seeing here. I applaud Million for his fervor...

That being said, Through my profession and exposure in life, I have met many people in my life. More Christians than Muslim... and those who followed Islam, as an aggregate group, were more "Christian" than the Christians I knew. (By Christian I mean Loving, kind, forgiving, pious, giving etc. They had great respect for Mary. (BTW: Mary is mentioned more times in the Koran as the Mother of Christ than in the Bible...))

Note that I am not defining Christian as those who believe in Jesus as son of god or are evangelic about Christanity. That would be a silly definition, because then, all you would need to do to be a good Christian is Believe in Christ and talk alot about him. Anyone who has read the Bible knows that there is much more to ALL forms of Christianity than that. (Unless they choose to ignore much of what is written in the new testament.)

Thankfully, this thread has chosen to ignore the multitude of other faiths :)

And, before it comes up. Yes, I have read the Koran, the Old Testament, The New Testament, the Torah, Buddhist Sutra, The Bhagvad Gita... etc. :cool:

[Jason_Els]

The historical Jesus?

I was also raised a Unitarian but was sent to Catholic school from grades three through eight. Weird combo I know.

I like Jesus. Took a lot of balls to stand up for his beliefs and I think his messages of love and the Golden Rule are worth attention. He was a good man who loved children, the poor, the sick, and gave these people hope when they had none before. He certainly practiced what he preached and died for it.

The Jesus we know in the New Testament is rather different from the Jesus described by contemporary sources. We know that Jesus lived not only from the Bible but from Josephus, a contemporary historian. If you read the Gnostic gospels of Mary, Thomas, and Philip, you get a picture of Jesus as a radical who really did threaten the rule of Rome and, particularly, Herod. You also find some extremely strong hints that Jesus was indeed married to the Magdalene who was not a whore but from a prominent family of priests. Jesus came from the house of David and though poor he was an aristocrat of sorts. In America it's hard to imagine that someone poor would have high status but in the rest of the world birth counts for nearly everything. Take a look at the Gnostic gospels. They were written at the time of Jesus and Thomas in particular seems to quote Jesus as a biographer would quote his subject.

Some of the more intense things:


Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war.

For there will be five in a house: there'll be three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone."


39. Jesus said, "The Pharisees and the scholars have taken the keys of knowledge and have hidden them. They have not entered nor have they allowed those who want to enter to do so.

As for you, be as sly as snakes and as simple as doves."


53. His disciples said to him, "Is circumcision useful or not?"

He said to them, "If it were useful, their father would produce children already circumcised from their mother. Rather, the true circumcision in spirit has become profitable in every respect."


78. Jesus said, "Why have you come out to the countryside? To see a reed shaken by the wind? And to see a person dressed in soft clothes, [like your] rulers and your powerful ones? They are dressed in soft clothes, and they cannot understand truth."


102. Jesus said, "Damn the Pharisees! They are like a dog sleeping in the cattle manger: the dog neither eats nor [lets] the cattle eat."


103. Jesus said, "Congratulations to those who know where the rebels are going to attack. [They] can get going, collect their imperial resources, and be prepared before the rebels arrive."

Clearly, this Jesus wasn't the pastoral, sanitized Jesus we get in the New Testament. Jesus was a rabble rouser, speaking sometimes in riddles and sometimes in highly abstract concepts. He appears to have been openly hostile to both the religious and secular governments and preached blasphemous teachings. I would very much have liked to know him and see how the history compares with the reality.

[Jason_Els]

As to the Koran...

Most non-Muslims are conflicted about just what Islam believes. I know Muslims and I don't believe any of them follow the Koran literally despite what it says. In fact I know a Sufi who would be persecuted in his homeland for his adherence to Sufism. What gives non-Muslims pause are the lines that are quoted from the Koran and, apparently, the words of Mohammed. It's difficult to understand when the headlines are full of radical Muslims promoting terrorism and using the Koran to justify it. Similarly, Muslims aren't speaking out loud enough against terrorism. American Muslim leaders should know they need to get out there and tell America, and the rest of the world, that they do not support Muslim extremism.

Here are some quotes from the Koran that need pondering:



"Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (Surah 9:27-)

"...make war on the leaders of unbelief...Make war on them: God will chastise them at your hands and humble them. He will grant you victory over them..." (Surah 9:12-)

"Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme." (Surah 2:190-)

"Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)

"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme." (Surah 8:36-)

"Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them." (Surah 9:121-)

When the sacred months have passed away, THEN SLAY THE IDOLATERS WHEREVER YOU FIND THEM, AND TAKE THEM CAPTIVES AND BESIEGE THEM AND LIE IN WAIT FOR THEM IN EVERY AMBUSH, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them (Surah 9:5)

I WILL CAST TERROR INTO THE HEARTS OF THOSE WHO DISBELIEVE. THEREFORE STRIKE OFF THEIR HEADS AND STRIKE OFF EVERY FINGERTIP OF THEM. THIS IS BECAUSE THEY ACTED ADVERSELY TO ALLAH AND HIS MESSENGER; AND WHOEVER ACTS ADVERSELY TO ALLAH AND HIS MESSENGER - THEN SURELY ALLAH IS SEVERE IN REQUITING (EVIL). THIS - TASTE IT, AND (KNOW) THAT FOR THE UNBELIEVERS IS THE PUNISHMENT OF FIRE. (Surahs 8:12-13)

:O

This is, uh, disturbing. Now I know full well that there are quotes from the Old Testament equally as awful but Christians will state that their god is that of the New Testament and, in any event, you haven't seen Christians running around blowing themselves to bits or making holy war in quite a few centuries. We don't see images of people from other faiths dressing their children in little "human bomb" uniforms or mothers saying they hope their child grows up to be a suicide bomber. We don't see non-Muslims flying planes into buildings, chanting "Death to America" in the streets, or cheering at the collapse of the WTC.

Mohammed led armies in war. The idea that a religious leader would lead a war is antithetical to the other large world religions where peace and the Golden Rule are the overriding philosophies.

Non-Mulsims, and in particular the people of the nations targeted by Muslim terrorists, need answers to these outstanding issues lest the divide between Islam and the rest of the world become so great that Islam itself becomes a byword for hate, murder, zealotry, and terrorism.

[philadelph]

Million is correct. Have you read the Koran? Have you read the teaching of Islam? Doesn't matter how many we know, it is what we know about their belief. GS

Sure, a literal reading of either the Koran or the Bible could be construed as violent. To say it is based on this, and pull a few war-like scriptures means nothing. And yes, I have studied the Koran, and written a short paper examining these issues.

I do believe that the Koran, when read by extremist militant groups, could be dangerous, but the Bible can be used for evil as well.

[millionman]

I'm posting an article about the Anti-Israel protests lead over in LONDON which is supposedly a peaceful place similar to America in regards to "friendly" muslims. If you do a study of Islam you will clearly see that it was used as a means of control over the nations that were conquered by the Arab armies, and can be traced directly back to the sun god. Check this link and read a bit on the history of Islam: http://www.chick.com/information/religions/islam/allah.asp

Calls for Israel's destruction in London


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yaakov Lappin, THE JERUSALEM POST May. 22, 2005

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

A central London rally organized by the British Palestine Solidarity Campaign on Saturday heard Respect Party MP George Galloway advocate a general boycott of Israel, as well as other speeches calling for Israel's destruction.

Dark gray clouds poured heavy rain on London's Trafalgar Square, as a crowd waving Palestine flags and anti-Israel banners filled the square to hear speakers shout vitriolic anti-Israel speeches. Demonstrators chanted Islamic slogans and flags calling for "victory to the intifada" were waved. Leading figures in Britain's anti-Israel coalition also lined up to attack Israel.

Andrew Birgin, of the Stop the War Coalition, urged the destruction of the State of Israel. "Israel is a racist state! It is an apartheid state! With its Apache helicopters and its F-16 fighter jets! The South African apartheid state never inflicted the sort of repression that Israel is inflicting on the Palestinians," he said to loud applause. "When there is real democracy, there will be no more Israel!" concluded Birgin. "Allahu Akbar!" yelled several men repeatedly in response.

Speaking to The Jerusalem Post, Birgin said he was referring to Israel "in the sense that it exists now," and said he wanted to see a "democratic secular state in which peace can move forward."

The Palestinian representative to the UK, Husam Zomlot, also addressed the rally.

"As we speak today, the Israelis are continuing the ethnic cleansing campaign they started in 1948," he said. "To the Israelis, I say that there will absolutely be no peace without the right of return." "The right of return is non-negotiable! Apartheid no more!" exclaimed Zomlot.

"We urge our government to cease all trade with Israel," said Jeremy Corbyn, a backbench Labor MP, who went on to express support for nuclear spy Mordechai Vanunu.

Former Labor MP Tony Benn said that "the apartheid wall should be removed," referring to the security fence built by Israel to prevent Palestinian suicide bombers from reaching Israeli cities.

Calling American president George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon the "two most dangerous men in the world," Benn condemned America's military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, and Israel's anti-terrorism measures.

"My dear friends, if this process continues, there will be possibly some sort of a world war," said Benn. "We are talking about respect for international law," he added.

Paul Mackney, president of Britain's second largest university teachers' union, NATPHE, also spoke to the rally. "We stand in solidarity with our Palestinian brothers and sisters. Palestinian refugee camps are like open air prisons," said Mackney. "The Israeli army frequently invades them. There will be no peace in the Middle East until there is justice for the Palestinian people.

"We are calling on all unions to join us," he added. There has been speculation that NATPHE may hold a vote in its upcoming meeting to join the AUT's boycott of Israeli universities.

Galloway, the newly elected MP for the anti-Iraq war Respect Party, used the rally as an attempt to launch an international boycott of Israel.

"It's about time that the British government made some reparations for the Balfour declaration," said Galloway. "Instead, Tony Blair said that Israel has no better friend than the British government. We say to Mr. Blair: You should be ashamed by that.

"The Palestinian people are like the 300 Spartans holding the pass of Thermopylae, until the others can arrive and come to their side. We will join them, by boycotting Israel. By boycotting Israeli goods. By picketing the stores that are selling Israeli goods," he said to cheers and applause.

Azzam Tamimi, head of the Muslim Association of Britain, delivered an Islamist speech, guided by an ideology that rejects nation states in favor of a global Islamic state. "There are 22 stupid Arab states, why have another stupid Palestinian state?" he asked. "I don't want another Palestinian state, I want Jaffa free, I want Haifa free, I want every inch of Palestine free!

"I don't want to see any form of racist nationalism. And the most racist form of nationalism is Zionism. The problem is with a nationalist ideology that is the most racist on the face of the earth."

Stuart Pexley, a former Catholic bishop, and a member of Pax Christi, said: "Jesus Christ attempted to create a new humanity without divisions. As a Christian I am opposed to the apartheid wall."

"This morning we've had a message from the Palestine General Federation of Trade Unions, saying they support the AUT boycott, and call for the May 26 AUT conference to boycott Haifa and Bar-Ilan University," said Corbyn, before introducing Sue Blackwell, the Birmingham lecturer who presented anti-Israel boycott motions passed by the Association of University Teachers last month.

Blackwell attacked opponents to the boycott of Israeli universities, listing the Board of Deputies, the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Congress.

"We can't expel anyone from the union for breaking the boycott, so why is it that the whole world has gone completely hysterical?" she asked.

She bitterly criticized the upcoming emergency May 26 AUT meeting which will vote on a motion to overturn the boycotts. "When the issue is Israel, suddenly the procedures of the union are undemocratic, and a special meeting of the council has to be called, in over to overturn the motion. Comrades, it's not us who are making a special case for Israel, it's the people who lost the vote who are," said Blackwell.

"I'm not very optimistic about the outcome," she added "We are up against a backlash, being promoted by a well-organized, well-funded pro-Israeli lobby." Blackwell also attacked the University of Haifa, and accused it of holding a "racist conference on Arab demographics."

"I stand absolutely by every word in the motion. What we said about Haifa is an understatement. This is a university, which just hosted a conference, two days after the anniversary of the Nakba, entitled 'The demographic problem.' Brothers and sisters, a university which organizes a racist conference as Haifa has just done deserves every bit of trouble it gets from trade unionists in the UK."

"We did not defame Haifa, but what is defamatory is attacks in the press calling us anti-Semitic," said Blackwell.

Speaking to the Post about links on her personal homepage to neo-Nazi Web sites, she described as "defamatory rubbish" the article that exposed them. Blackwell promised to "make a statement" to the Post about the links, which she has since removed, in the near future.

The rally was also attended by members of the fringe anti-Zionist haredi Natorei Karta sect, who held signs which read: "Palestine from the Jordan River to the Sea." "We are abiding by the Torah," said one member. "They [the Israelis] have no right to exist. Israel will fail. Before Israel, Jews were living well in Arab countries," he added.

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1116642367186

anti-semitism is growing exponentially these days.

In regards to my own personal studies, I have read the Book of Mormon. I've spent time reading a bit of Buddhist teachings back when I was a bit younger and exploring, as well as looking into Confuscian ideals. I had to findout for myself, and by experiencing God first hand, baring witness to things that can not be explained such as blind seeing, the crippled walking, things of this nature still exist in our current day. My Faith in Yahweh has only been increased because of these things, but I had come to Faith in him before this. These things have only occurred recently, and I have stood amazed at what He has done, and I look forward to seeing even greater things than this.

The gnostic "gospels" were not authored by the people that they are named for, and this my friend is fact. Written over 100 years after Christ death and some not authenticated until 300 years after can not stand in the same arena with the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These four are accepted as being written between a period between 31 ad - 65 ad. The number of copies of these gospels is so numerous that they outnumber the closest competitor (Alexander the Great's biography) by more than 100,000. You do not have to take my word for this but search out for the info, and if you want a good resource for it check out The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel who's desire for this book was to completely undeify Christ but also to prove He never existed, good read as Mr. Strobel interviews men who have spent years on the subjects adressed in this book.

I also would like to point out that it was not Jesus who was thought to have been a political radical but Josephus mentions Christ because of the rabble rouser John the Baptist who was known for his direct speech and also for living out in the wilderness as the wild prophet of God. John the Baptist was the man who cleaned the way for Jesus Christ, and they were indeed cousins. God is awesome in all ways may we bless His name before all men, and proclaim the Kingdom of God.

[derringer57]

Jesus was 1 of 3 things...

1) Son of God - What he claimed to be
2) Crazy - Whacko for claiming such things
3) Liar - Like the guy in Waco, TX who ran the cult

You cant "respect" Jesus if you dont agree with what he said. Its illogical. I know I am going to get bashed because I wont join the relativist of whatever someone believes is right to them and whatever I believe is right to me, but anyway, I think he is the Son of God.

BTW, the Bible is the most accurately translated text to date, more accurate than many of Shakespearre's (sp?) works...

[AcesHigh]

million,

Preach on brother.

Million made an interesting thread, with the proper title, etc. Pretty good stuff, which brought in a lot of other posts. So what's wrong with that. It just appears to have made several guys uncomfortable. Discomfort can be good.

I actually did not read all of million's Bible sitings. I have read them all before, and know of what he writes. What is interesting to me is that the replies to million are all extremely predictable, given that the Bible lays out each of these 'points of view' in one place or another. IOW, not only does the Bible, especially Jesus' words, show the right way to live, but it also tells how men will twist things to avoid the word, or to ignore it. It has all been predicted. I find that interesting.

BiggerWhat is even more interesting is the fact "people of god" spread like a fucking plague, have caused millions of deaths, and they call me ignorant. I am an Odinist, and practice what my ancestors of nordic and celtic europe practiced. No christian can tell me to practice otherwise. I am just thankful you christians arent killing us pagans anymore.

Brother will kill brother, spilling blood across the land, killing for religion, something I don't understand.

Dave Mustaine, 1990

[millionman]

ACES, you're ignorant as to what true men and women of GOD are like. We aren't the ones who did all the killing and blood spilling. The Catholic Church was and is a huge part of the Apostate church which may include Christ but has nothing to do with what He taught and who He really was. Look into some of these issues, Mary, Crown Vicar of Christ (POPE), infant baptism, Confession, priests and nuns, apostolic sucession, and these are just a few of the things that you could research. The Catholic Church is leading millions of people to the depths because of what they teach, such as the seven necessities of salvation, but Christ said believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that I am LORD and ye shall be saved, and that is all that is required. So they are teaching directly agains what Jesus said, and Christ also said if ye abide in my WORD then ye are my disciple. If abiding in His word is necessary to be a disciple then teaching contrary to it must mean that you are not truly His disciple, and in you shall not listen to such a man or pay his teaching any heed at all, so says the Lord. I know you're not interested in this as you have told me before when I PMed you, but this in all actuality would clear up some of what you think has transpired throughout history but this just is not so. Blessings to you Aces....

[millionman]

A pioneer of Christian happy-talk
Posted: April 23, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

To attract the largest followings possible and because they have bought the lie of the new tolerance, many of America's churches, Christian publishers and Christian radio stations – whether they know it or not – have rejected biblical Christianity and adopted the more popular but bogus gospel of Christian happy-talk. As a result, churches brim with converts committed only to their personal self-actualization, publishers lavish feel-good pabulum on their readers, and the airwaves ring with an emotive rendering of Christianity that would fit nicely alongside the corruptions of faith Jesus chides in the second and third chapters of Revelation.

More than 30 years ago, Vance Havner, in his book "Playing Marbles with Diamonds," offered the following insightful:

The devil is not fighting religion; he is too smart for that. He is producing a counterfeit Christianity so much like the real one that good Christians are afraid to speak out against it. … We are plainly told in the Scriptures that in the last days men will not endure sound doctrine and will depart from the truth and heap to themselves teachers to tickle their ears. We live in an epidemic of this itch, and popular preachers have developed ear-tickling to a fine art. Today, the angle is to avoid "negative" preaching and accentuate only the positive.

Havner wrote at a time when the work of one of America's most influential pioneers of Christian happy-talk was fomenting what is still a powerful factor in the happy-talk world. A follower of Norman Vincent Peale, Robert Schuller has become the face and voice of today's "Christian" self-esteem movement. Of course, there is nothing Christian or biblical about Schuller's self-idolatry message. It is clearly more akin to New Age thinking.

Nevertheless, Schuller is one of America's most well-known TV preachers and authors, and is pastor of arguably the most famous mega-church of all time. In fact, as pastor of The Crystal Cathedral, Schuller claims to be the father of the mega-church movement. In the April 10, 2002, issue of The Christian Century, Schuller claims, "I launched the mega-church movement through the Institute for Successful Church Leadership in 1970."

Many look to Schuller and his church as the model for achieving mega-church status. Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, Bruce Wilkinson and scores of America's best-selling authors and most well-known pastors have either spoken at Schuller's Institute for Successful Church Leadership or attended the conference. Perhaps this explains why so many of these authors avoid in-depth discussions of man's total depravity, the biblical doctrine of repentance, the moral law, or the need to die to self and reject the lie of self-love.

Mega-churches and many "Christian" books today conspire to make people feel good – to be comfortable with themselves. Preaching the cross and our need to die to self does not meet acceptable Christian happy-talk standards. In an interview with Christianity Today, published on Oct. 5, 1984, Robert Schuller noted:

I don't think anything has been done in the name of Christ and under the banner of Christianity that has proven more destructive to human personality and, hence counterproductive to the evangelism enterprise, than the often crude, uncouth and un-Christian strategy of attempting to make people aware of their lost and sinful condition.

In his book "Self-Esteem, the New Reformation," Schuller argues that we now have a far more enlightened understanding of what is really going on in our souls: "Lack of self-love or self-esteem, here is a scientific, scriptural doctrine of original sin."

What Bible is he reading from? According to mine, the original sin of Adam and Eve was a choice of desiring what they – the self – wanted over what God desired for them. Adam and Eve succumbed to Satan's lie of human supremacy, which is to love self to the extent of seeing yourself as god. They also believed the favorite falsehood of humanism that they could be the ones to determine truth and to control their destinies. It was the desire to serve "self," not God, that led to disobedience and the original sin.

Later in his book, Schuller reveals the core of happy-talk teaching: "Let us start with a theology of salvation that addresses itself at the outset to man's deepest need, the 'will to self worth.'" But the truth is, man's deepest need is not "self worth" but forgiveness of sins through repentance and belief in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Unless we die to our own will and the desires of self-love and become alive to Christ and His will, there is no salvation.

When describing salvation, Jesus' words never sounded remotely like those of Robert Schuller. That belies the fact that the messages of Robert Schuller and Jesus Christ are in direct conflict. Jesus spoke about self-denial and dying to self, while Schuller promotes self-worship.

In Luke 14, Jesus describes the actions of a true believer and not once does He commend the need to love one's self. To the contrary, He even calls us to hate our own lives:

If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple.

Luke 9:23-26 is even unhappier in its talk. Jesus enumerates the requirements of His followers, including the need to reject the love of self:

And He was saying to them all, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels."

Elsewhere, the Bible variously calls the works of self "filthy rags," notes that apart from Christ "I am as a little worm," describes people as "children of wrath" before trusting in Jesus Christ, and claims "we were dead in trespasses and sins." The Bible clearly is not high on the virtues of mankind. It says there is "no one good, no not one." Only God and His Son Christ Jesus are without sin.

To teach self-esteem or man's basic goodness is to say that mankind really was not 100 percent in need of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross. The self-esteem movement says people are perhaps good enough to pass through judgment on their own merit. Even if mankind is bad, we're not all that bad – certainly not totally depraved – only in need of a bit of work on the cross to make up for a few little failings, shortcomings and flaws.

To justify their self-love theology, many cite the biblical admonition that we are to love our neighbors as ourselves. They point to Leviticus 19:18 (which Jesus Himself quoted): "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." How, they argue, are we to love our neighbors as ourselves if we do not fully love ourselves? But if you look at Leviticus 19:9-18, the entire list of things God is telling us that we must and must not do falls in the context of how we should treat each other in our daily conduct. The list of requirements never moves from the physical and emotional realm into adjectives or descriptions that involve an inner worship of one another, the affirmation of one another as good, or even as being lovely, lovable or worthy of love. When the admonition is read in context, it is clear that we are to look out for the best interest of others and not simply think only of our own best interests – contrary to the natural, sinful, reflex of every human being.

Robert Schuller, like many of today's liberal pastors, have a strong desire to avoid using the "S" word. In "Self-Esteem, The New Reformation," Schuller writes: "Salvation is defined as rescue from shame to glory. It is salvation from guilt to pride, from fear to love, from distrust to faith, from hypocrisy to honesty." Schuller never uses the word "sin" and says nothing about repentance. This kind of misleading verbiage actually leads people away from salvation, for without acknowledging sin and repenting of that sin, there can be no salvation.

This is quite clear in I John 1:8-10: "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us."

Actually, I should acknowledge that Schuller doesn't' forsake the "S" word entirely. He offers a rather creative re-invention that still shields us from the dark reality of our needs when he writes, "So lack of trust or a lack of self-worth is the central core of sin."

Uh … no. The central core of sin is disobedience toward God and our being in rebellion against His character and nature. The more we focus on self and self-worth, self-importance or our rights, the deeper our offending sin.

Schuller also writes, "Jesus Christ employed a strategy of evangelism where he never called a person a 'sinner.' They were sinners, of course, but he never told them they were."

I repeat: What Bible is that? Jesus not only told His audience He was calling sinners to repentance, but He called some of them names even less flattering than "sinner." How would today's happy-talk audience like to be addressed as "vipers," "serpents" or "tombs"?

In II Timothy 4:3-4, Paul predicted that we would see false teachers like the happy-talk crowd and that many in the audience would eagerly accept their false teachings:

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.

Jesus soundly warns us of the punishment that awaits those who add or take away from the Scriptures. He notes that we would be better off to tie a millstone around our necks and jump in a lake rather than to doctrinally deceive children or those that are new to the faith.

Alas, Christian happy-talk has become very profitable. But then what will it really profit anyone to gain the world and lose the soul?

[Priapologist]

Galatians 5
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26Let us not become conceited, provoking, and envying each other.

Matthew 7
1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

Mea culpa

[millionman]

Hey Priap, could you possibly expand on what you are trying to get across by posting those two scriptures? I can interpret the intent, and in their meaning according to the context of the Word, but what is your intent with them?

[Priapologist]

...but what is your intent with them?

Look at the two words at the end of my post.

[millionman]

me·a cul·pa (mā'ə kŭl'pə, mē'ə) pronunciation
n.

An acknowledgment of a personal error or fault.

What would you be apologizing for?

[Priapologist]

me·a cul·pa (mā'ə kŭl'pə, mē'ə) pronunciation
n.

An acknowledgment of a personal error or fault.

What would you be apologizing for?

Millionman, you have my pity.

[millionman]

Why would you pity me?

In the verses you posted the letter to the Galatians is written by the Apostle Paul to a body of believers. They word you have highlghted does not pretain to non-believers. Paul is pointing out that as men of the Spirit we do not live according to the world and we should not act as the world does, and we should treat one another according to the Spirit of the Lord.

In your second posting this is not a chastisement as we are not able to judge, or that we should not judge as you are obviously pointing out. It is the reality that we are called to discernment and honesty in dealing with each other as believers but also as non-believers. Christ's emphasis here is that we would judge according to LOVE and not according to opinion or where you are currently, but there is necessity to judge but to judge according to the Love of Christ as that we would meet them where they are currently, not as a means to discard them and do away with them. It's not about harsh treatment of the individual, this ties in with Christ also saying if you do not forgive men their transgressions I will not forgive yours to the Father. It's all part of Christ command to love the Father with your whole heart, mind, body, and soul and to LOVE as He has loved.

So am I deserving of pity Priap or are you attempting to make these words fit into your own agenda? If it is the latter then my friend I love you and pray that you will see this grievous error, as what you are stating in no way fits into the context of the books as a whole nor is the meaning implied fit into these verses as you have presented them. Christ spoke directly to the sins of the people, to the Samaritan woman He told her that she had lain with many men and that her position was not virtuous or Holy one but that she was forgiven. Is that a judgement, yes but He did so that she might come into relationship with Him. He convicts us of our sins not by harsh judgement as that which God utilized during the Flood but a different judgement that we would be convicted of the sin in our life and walk away from it toward him, not to our own destruction but to eternal life in Him.

[Priapologist]

Drop it.

[millionman]

Drop it? Why am I dropping it, all I wanted was for you to make yourself clear, as opposed to being cryptic so that we might be able to converse on this a bit more. I just want a bit of clarification priapologist, that's all. Otherwise it's not conversing and sharing the Love of Christ it's about being right or wrong, and this thread is not about that it's about brining people to see that Christ was no myth, and that He is much more than what "church" makes him out to be. So I am asking you to make yourself clear so that we may openly discuss, let nothing be kept in the dark and bring questions forward and they will be answered and discussed in full view of this forum.

[Rod Buster]

It's clear to me- that Jesus rocks!!

[Kraft]

Jesus was 1 of 3 things...

1) Son of God - What he claimed to be
2) Crazy - Whacko for claiming such things
3) Liar - Like the guy in Waco, TX who ran the cult


There are a few more options that you are not considering. Jesus could be a myth made up to fufill the messiah prophecy and never have actually existed (midrash). Could have been a normal man who was mythicized, etc. If you see Jesus as some type of mythical figure you can respect the message, even if he never existed. I haven't read the whole NT yet, but the doctrine of hell and self mutilation, I find quite disturbing. I'm unsure he existed, as I have never seen any contemporary accounts for it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence...

[9cyclops9]

Doctrine of Self Mutilation? I don't think I've ever heard of that one. Could you explain what you mean?

It's a commonly accepted fact among historians that Jesus was in fact a historical figure and that he did exist. There are records from that time period that indicate this.

[Kraft]

The whole "if your eye cause you to sin, cut it out, rather enter heaven with one eye than see hell" "if your leg causes you to sin, cut it off, rather than enter hell on two".

As for records, can you give me any links or references? All I have seen are decades or generations later.

[9cyclops9]

Those passages you're referring aren't intended to be taken literally. What he means is to remove whatever is in your life that's tempting you. For instance, for a while, coming to MOS was tempting me to look at porn (I had a personal conviction about this, some Christians don't), so I left for a while until I got that part of my life straightened out. This is what the verse means.

As for references, off the top of my head I can think of "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. Strobel had set out to disprove the existence of Christ (which was originally going to be the topic of the book), but through researching for his book he encountered overwhelming evidence that Christ did indeed exist. I believe he has several references in there, but I don't have the book with me at the moment. As far as other references, I'll have to look for that. I'll try to find some over the weekend, or I'm sure other members can point you in the right direction if I don't get to it first.

[millionman]

You can always look at the Roman 1st century historian Josephus as an outside source. He is one that is pointed to most often because he lived during the time period, and wrote about Jesus' association with John the Baptist.

As far as these myth ideas, as I have found that anyone who presents this as fact and points to other mythical characers and then proclaim that Christ never existed are ignoring the evidence of Josephus, as well as ignoring the Gospels as historically factual. The four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John are considered by historians to be 99.9% accurate because of the number of original complete texts in Hebrew and Greek. On top of this there are also partial copies that also verify the events occurring as written in the complete texts. The whole presentation made by people that have written books on the topic of the "mythical" Christ present it as fact with no evidence to disprove the above examples, so they do not include this information as to bring about a stronger case for their side, but in the light of this information they have no legs to stand on.

In the case of Liar, Lunatic, or Lord this idea of a mythical Christ is thrown out because of the historical evidence, so it's not even a discussion because the evidence mounts against this train of thought and eleminates it from possibility. So in this regard a man who claimed to be God has only three options. He would be a lunatic, because who runs around claiming to be God's son? He would be a liar, because he's claiming deity but knows he is not and more over why would he knowing the truth go to his own death (again making him crazy). He would be Lord if He claimed to be God accompanied by miraculous signs and wonders (magicians can't raise people from the dead or give the blind sight), He would have to Love unconditionally, and give of Himself to death. That is the requirement of God's word in the prophecies of the Messiah in the Old Testament, which is a very good portion of the Bible and I honestly reccomend anyone wondering about the Christ that would come as there are over 300 prophecies about Him (from what house he would be born, the manner of his birth, manner of death, to even the things he would say). In more than 300 ways Jesus proved Himself to be honest by God's prophetic word, and this is indeed impossible to manufacture. If these things had not occurred the leaders of the day would have stood and said this man is false and is not the Son of God but a liar. They lost their power and influence over the people. This is all worth looking into, no one has to take my word for it. I have no reason to lie to anyone, as I'm not trying to take your money or to tell you life will be easy, or name it and it will be yours. I come to bring the Truth out, and to reveal that the Son of God is the only path to Him. Other than that I have no reason, but that our Father in Heaven be glorified.

[Kraft]

9cyclops9: Seems you don't like the implications of taking that literally, so you are reinterpreting it. Problem is if you start taking things as metaphors, you can pick and choose what you like and the bible will conform to your presupposed notions of what you think it says and what god/Jesus are like. From history I know this passage has led to many castrations among other things.

I've read Strobel's 'Case for a Creator', I found it quite poor. Don't know if I could read another of his as I didn't like the style.

Million: Josephus would not be a contemporary source, his writing appears later. Furthermore it would be second hand at best. Lastly, the passage is regarded as a later insertion, so it can't be used as evidence.

The gospels are not historically factual either. They do not agree with each other, even in something as basic as Jesus' decent (I know you'll say one is Mary's line, but I don't think that flies). The gospels were written decades or generations after Jesus' supposed existence according to what I've seen, thus they can't be taken as historical or contemporary accounts. The crucifixion and resurrections stories don't match up either. The supposed slaughter of children King Herod has no historical record. The dead sea scrolls don't include any of the NT from what I've seen, what original texts are you talking of. Also, what historians? I don't think anyone outside of fundamentalists would declare them perfectly historical.

If I suppose he existed, and take up your 3 options. I would conclude that he was a lunatic and a liar. Liar for promising a return within the generation at hand, and lunatic for claiming to be god. As for the 300 prophecies, I can write a book and give lots of predictions then write another where my character fulfills them, has anything miraculous happened? This is how I regard much of the gospels right now. They were midrash, the OT was used as a reference to write a story of the messiah. There are many verses that match right up, such as the Immanuel line in Matthew, it comes from Isaiah IIRC. I noticed a progression in the crucifixion/resurrection story going through the gospels, as if they had to add more to make their story unique. I am astonished there are no accounts of the 'saints that rose from their graves and visited people' (Matthew 27:52-53). If a zombie saint showed up at my door that would be something worth writing down.

Like you I seek truth, and am trying to uncover it. If it leads to christianity, I have no problem with that. I'm a skeptical though, it comes from being a freethinker.

[millionman]

Kraft, the gospels do agree with the lineage of Jesus. What would you suppose they do not agree on? He is of the House of David born to the virgin Mary, as was prophecied about. If you were to look into the historians who have studied the Gospels (original texts) they agree upon their accuracy (there are over 100,000 complete and partial texts) this evidence does not need to be supported by the Dead Sea Scrolls, as these scrolls are from the Essenes who did not exist during the first century.

As far as you saying you could write a story and fitting everything into a nice little package, that's very true. If you wanted people to buy into it though you would make sure that everything fit, and that the subjects were loyal to Jesus throughout that he was a man worth following to the death without hesitation. This is not the case in the Gospels as He was denied three times by Peter, he was also abandoned by all of his disciples during his trial. They would later go to their deaths for Him, but this is not so during the time of his trial as they feared for themselves. You would not include this in your story as it does not emanate power or authority.

As for the Dead saints rising this did occur, as did the earth quake as it was recorded. So would you suppose that the earthquake occurance being wirtten of but the saints not being recorded discredits it, or would people claiming to have seen dead people seem a bit absurd and out there even for the time. I would keep that to myself personally.

As for Josephus his work was written between and compiled during the twenty or so years after his death, and yes it is believed that the portion of the writing where it reads "and many believed him to be the Christ" is an addition in later years, but this is not the portion I am concerned with it is the portion in regards to his association with John the Bpatist who is written about and did indeed exist. So at least one of the NT characters did indeed live during the first century. The Gospels are accepted as being written between 33-65 a.d. The Gospels are to be accepted as accurate by the historical standards set by academics world wide because the biography of Alexander the great is accepted as 66% accurate by the current standard although there is one complete copy and about 1500 partial copies. The number of sources as well as the time frame written are what verify the sources accuracy, but the biography of Alexander was not compiled till nearly 100 years after his death, although it is believed that his biography was being compiled shortly after his death. So the assumption that the Gospels would be considered inaccurate is not fact according to the historical standard that exists in determining the historical accuracy of documents such as these. There has to be a process through which these things are assessed otherwise we could accept nothing as historically accurate, and the events that are believed to have occured would be pure myth as myths do not require a standard, but the events of history do.

Why did you find Strobel's work to be poor? I'll send you a copy of the case for Christ as he deals with men and women who have worked on these very topics for a life's work, and they are the authorities in the areas he is dealing with in his book. He was an atheist at the outset of this book, and wanted to dismantle Christ, which as I can tell you from trying myself it is not an easy task as the evidence substantiates the claim of Jesus Christ existence. It has not ever been successfully done, unless of course the individual writing the discourse sets out with their mind made up as to what they will and won't use as evidence. This is not about presenting a side of a story or defending a position, but about sharing the facts and if the evidence does not support Jesus existence then I will accept that, but in my experience before coming to Christ as Lord and Savior I could not conclude that He did not exist but that He in fact existed, but it was another issue altogether to accept Him as Lord, and that is individual and personal.

How would you explain the Apostle Paul's transition from being a Jewish Pharisee and persecuting Christians, then to being the greatest advocate of Jesus Christ?

[Kraft]

Kraft, the gospels do agree with the lineage of Jesus. What would you suppose they do not agree on? He is of the House of David born to the virgin Mary, as was prophecied about.

Read Matthew 1:1-17, then check Luke 3: 23-38 These geneologies do not match up. Given both include David so as to fulfill that prophecy, very few other decendents match.


You would not include this in your story as it does not emanate power or authority.

That's questionable, I might like to make my characters have emotions. So that they may be scared or betray friends. I think this is just a lot of speculation. My main point here is that with the verse carry over from the OT, many times verbatim, the likelyhood of it just being a retelling to fulfill prophesy goes up.

I would record a dead saint's visit, but that's just me. That the gospels make no mention of who the saints were and what became of them makes it suspicious.

I was under the impression that the gospels were written ~60-120 AD, not 33-65. The connection to John the baptist, hm, I'll have to look into that.


The Gospels are to be accepted as accurate by the historical standards set by academics world wide because the biography of Alexander the great is accepted as 66% accurate by the current standard although there is one complete copy and about 1500 partial copies.

Comparing Alexander the Great and Jesus doesn't really work. Claims of AtG are that he was man, who conquered much land, did battle and later died. These are things that men do, so I can accept that he likely did such things and the historic AtG at least resembles the one written about. As for Jesus, curing the blind and lepers w/o medicine, virgin birth, walking on water and rising from the dead among other things are not what men can do. So accepting a historical version of that is much harder. If you want to prove that a man named Jesus was alive, that shouldn't be hard, there were many with the name at the time, but to say the bible Jesus existed takes a stretch of the imagination.

As for standards in history, it is not my area of study, so I'm unaware of their subtleties.


Why did you find Strobel's work to be poor?

I didn't like his playing naive on things, interviewing people to mine for quotes then forming ad hoc conclusions. His whole, 'if evolution is false, God wins by default' thing doesn't go over. A 'theory' such as ID or creationism, can't stand on evidence against a theory, it must have positive evidence of its own. If you want to send the book to me, if you think it's good I'd read it (send a PM). As for him being an atheist, I kind of doubt it. The way he approached case for a creator, it seemed more like he was someone who had drifted from the faith, but was still a theist.


I could not conclude that He did not exist but that He in fact existed, but it was another issue altogether to accept Him as Lord, and that is individual and personal.

I agree here, accepting that a miracle worker named Jesus existed v. him being the son of god, and the Christian God existing are another matter.


How would you explain the Apostle Paul's transition from being a Jewish Pharisee and persecuting Christians, then to being the greatest advocate of Jesus Christ?

I don't know, I haven't thought much about it.

To be honest, I just started getting into theology in the passed 6 months, so I'm still quite lacking in knowledge. Raised a Christian, currently an agnostic atheist (lack of knowledge, no belief) to most god concepts, while positive atheist to many others (such as say, Zeus).

[mogli]

Just my two cents and then I'm outta here. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make his dumbass drink. Questioning the validity of Jesus's existence? Whether you're Christian or not there's countless sources that validate his existence. Even Muslims and the Koran back this up. The world isn't flat either just so you know. :P

[Priapologist]

Drop it? Why am I dropping it, all I wanted was for you to make yourself clear, as opposed to being cryptic so that we might be able to converse on this a bit more. I just want a bit of clarification priapologist, that's all. Otherwise it's not conversing and sharing the Love of Christ it's about being right or wrong, and this thread is not about that it's about brining people to see that Christ was no myth, and that He is much more than what "church" makes him out to be. So I am asking you to make yourself clear so that we may openly discuss, let nothing be kept in the dark and bring questions forward and they will be answered and discussed in full view of this forum.

I pity you because you have the insight of a brick. My mea culpa was because I said some things in earlier posts that violated Biblical precepts, which I emphasized in the quoted verses. It had NOTHING to do with you, millionman, it was MY acknowledgement of error. You're just too thick to figure that out.


This is a Penis Enlargement website, not your bully pulpit. God loves you man, be happy with that.
Priap, one question, who am I bullying? Do you feel bullied?

Bullying? Dude, read this (http://www.c-span.org/guide/congress/glossary/bullypul.htm):


This term stems from President Theodore Roosevelt's reference to the White House as a "bully pulpit," meaning a terrific platform from which to persuasively advocate an agenda. Roosevelt often used the word "bully" as an adjective meaning superb/wonderful. Roosevelt also had political affiliation with the Progressive Party, nicknamed the "Bull Moose" party. It got the moniker when Roosevelt ran for President as its candidate in 1912, after declaring himself as "fit as a bull moose."

You lecture others about being ignorant, but you sir are guilty of being one of the most ignorant hacks on this forum. The preceeding is just an example. I am a Christian, millionman, and some of your views on Christianity make my flesh crawl. That crap that you spew about Muslims worshiping Satan is amazingly, achingly WRONG! You are singlehandedly wounding the cause of Christ with your OPINIONS as FACT mentality.

I didn't want to have to say any of this, which is why I told you to drop it, but you just kept on, hacking away and increasing your folly. Please, if you love Jesus as much as you claim to, shut up and educate yourself with something other than the internet and 'yes' books that fit your predisposed notions.

May God forgive me for being blunt.

[Shithead]

who's the guys who said the bit about "justifying own predispositions"? coz that's exactly what this is, and i see it time and time again.

[millionman]

I don't mind your bluntness, and I'm sure that Yahweh doesn't mind either. But my friend if you seem to think I am so thick then why don't you research the symbols associated with Islam and see what they connect to. Arabs are hateful and violent people, and they hate God's chosen people. This is very true, and I reccomend you read a book called The American Prophecies by Michael D. Evans who has spent majority of his adult life working in the Middle East relationships and has a good deal of insight into these relations.

Priap your assertion that the "holy" Quran does not openly disuss the conditions of the martyr and the ultimate reward for killing infidels, then you my friend are very mistaken. This is very true and you may wish to take your own advice on this. I've read the Book of Mormon and the Quran and I can tell you that neither one serves the one true God and it may help you to do some research into what these two specific groups believe. It would appear to me that you are quite possible going to tell me that Mormons are christian and the Jehovah's Witnesses are as well.

My sources do not merely prove any of my points. I have done the research and anyone who is not buying into the Islam is love and peaceful and we should give the palestinians a state (while splitting Israel into two parts) although in 3,000 years of history the arabs can make no legeal claim to the land then by all means my sources are wrong. These are men who have done the research who preach openly the Truth of Jesus Christ is Lord and this does not fit into the current global opinion as all paths lead to god, and this my friends is grave error, as the Bible makes this point very clear. So am I to say that yes islam is a religion full of love, peace, and harmony when they sent thousands of children into the mine fields to disarm the mines (meaning they blew up), what peaceful and loving religion does such a thing to children. This attempt at apeasement for oil is going to cost us much and if you doubt this look at what happened in WWII with the appeasement of Hitler and his war machine. The propoganda, the military processes, the governmental structure, and the manner in which we are attempting to appeal to them is the same way Chamberlain appealed to Hitler, give them land and they'll be satisfied.

If you wish to correct me biblically then feel free to do so, but if you are going to call me out and direct deragatory comments at me then I do not and can not stand corrected. You correct in a spirit of Love and righteousness and for this correction it requires biblical standards to be withheld, now if this is not the case then I am not in error as I have spoken directly from the bible and have not ventured on my own knowledge.

I would like you to point out what I am speaking to as being wrong? What have I spoken of from the New Testament that you would say is a load of crap? Am I not sharing according to the lovey dovey feel good crap that comes out of the "seeker sensitive" churches, or am I preaching the full counsel of the Lord?

[Priapologist]

...then why don't you research the symbols associated with Islam and see what they connect to...

What symbols are you talking about? Most Muslims reject the use of symbols because of the association between symbols, paganism, and idolatry. Their art is geometric and devoid of faces, animals, and symbols because they recognize that demons, Satan, and evil usually manifest in or as people, animals, and symbols.


Arabs are hateful and violent people...

Any more hateful and violent than us? Think about your own position before you answer that. Think about the number of murders, assaults, and hate crimes that occur in non-Muslim countries before you answer that.


...and they hate God's chosen people.

Who, exactly, are God's chosen people? Realize that it is a mighty presumptuous claim to make.


This is very true, and I reccomend you read a book called The American Prophecies by Michael D. Evans...

Recall that I mentioned 'yes' books? This sounds like one to me. From his own bio it would appear that Mr. Evan has a pro-Christian, pro-Israel, anti-Muslim bias. Here's what one reviewer had to say about the book:


While this book is informative and Mr. Evan’s passion is obvious, it is a difficult read as the first chapter seems little more than Christian conservative propaganda. However, skip the entire “In the Eye of the Prophetic Storm” chapter, and the book will take on a more rational, less hysterical quality. The use of fear as a writing device, mixed metaphors, slight redundancy, and many clichés made this a laborious read. I do recommend the book however for its information and ultimate call to prayer. This book would be great for intercessors. I disagree with the author’s final assessment of rapture as the outcome of America's decline, but learned a great deal in spite of our differing opinions. -- Suzanne Rae Deshchidn, Christian Book Previews.com


Priap your assertion that the "holy" Quran does not openly disuss the conditions of the martyr and the ultimate reward for killing infidels, then you my friend are very mistaken.

I never said that, did I? Go back through this thread and read all of my posts.


This is very true and you may wish to take your own advice on this. I've read the Book of Mormon and the Quran and I can tell you that neither one serves the one true God and it may help you to do some research into what these two specific groups believe.

I have.


It would appear to me that you are quite possible going to tell me that Mormons are christian and the Jehovah's Witnesses are as well.

You are making presumptions about my actions and opinions. Why are you bringing up Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses?


My sources do not merely prove any of my points. I have done the research and anyone who is not buying into the Islam is love and peaceful and we should give the palestinians a state (while splitting Israel into two parts) although in 3,000 years of history the arabs can make no legeal claim to the land then by all means my sources are wrong. These are men who have done the research who preach openly the Truth of Jesus Christ is Lord and this does not fit into the current global opinion as all paths lead to god, and this my friends is grave error, as the Bible makes this point very clear. So am I to say that yes islam is a religion full of love, peace, and harmony when they sent thousands of children into the mine fields to disarm the mines (meaning they blew up), what peaceful and loving religion does such a thing to children. This attempt at apeasement for oil is going to cost us much and if you doubt this look at what happened in WWII with the appeasement of Hitler and his war machine. The propoganda, the military processes, the governmental structure, and the manner in which we are attempting to appeal to them is the same way Chamberlain appealed to Hitler, give them land and they'll be satisfied.

I am uncertain as to your point here. Could you clarify this, please.


If you wish to correct me biblically then feel free to do so, but if you are going to call me out and direct deragatory comments at me...

You're right, I was derogatory to you, and I apologize for that. I also apologize to Swank for being derogatory to him earlier.


...then I do not and can not stand corrected. You correct in a spirit of Love and righteousness and for this correction it requires biblical standards to be withheld, now if this is not the case then I am not in error as I have spoken directly from the bible and have not ventured on my own knowledge.

Again, clarification is requested.


I would like you to point out what I am speaking to as being wrong? What have I spoken of from the New Testament that you would say is a load of crap?


That crap that you spew about Muslims worshiping Satan is amazingly, achingly WRONG!

Am I not sharing according to the lovey dovey feel good crap that comes out of the "seeker sensitive" churches, or am I preaching the full counsel of the Lord?

"Seeker sensitive" churches? Why are you bringing them up?

And, no, I don't think that you are preaching the full counsel of the Lord. Jesus never said to bear malice toward anyone just because they have a divergent faith, but you appear to have issues with not only Muslims, but Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and "seeker" Christians.

Listen, I really am sorry that I sunk to name calling, with you, with Swank, with anyone whom I've offended. That was the crux of my mea culpa: I am sometimes too open to being disparaging of people with whom I do not agree, or who impress me with their ignorance. As I said before, my mea culpa had nothing to do with you, and was simply my acknowledgement of error. You seemed to have felt that my post was somehow directed at you, but it wasn't.

[millionman]

PRIAP, First I can say that you don't know me, and the reality that regardless of what these groups believe I do love them, but does that keep the from having to face the reality of HELL, no. It is our jobs to be Bereans of the FAITH to make disciples of all nations (note that I did not say converts). There beliefs are wrong and according to God's Holy and Righteous word anything outside of Worshipping Him and Him alone is BAAL worship (which is always associated with Satan and Paganism).

As far as the full counsel of the Lord yes I do preach this way and it is how I live. You can not have love, peace, and charity without justice, kindness, forgiveness, and discernment. These are just a few of the topics that could be addressed rather easily, but issues on Spiritual gifts (prophecy and tongues mainly), works of the spirit, and true FAITH are not so easy to preach on, and you can also look into churches that preach repentance of sins are becoming more and more rare (this is why I included seeker sensitive churches because they're all love and acceptance without this very essential doctrine because it's "offensive" and "harsh"). Judgement and discernment are a packaged deal when it comes to being a good Berean as you see the Apostles in the Book of Acts were. We do not walk through this world blindly and are not called to do so, but we are made as the salt of the Earth and the LIGHT of the world. If this is the reality of the Body of Christ then according to Jesus Christ we can not join in unity with those in darkness or with those who are false teachers who teach false gospels. There is no unity with these because they are preaching a different "christ" and a different Truth, and this is not based on interpretation or having to agree with all matters of Truth but according to the standards set forth by Jesus and the Epistles. It is made clear that if a brother is in error, he is to be corrected (publicly) and if he will not be corrected and has been proven to be in the wrong then he is not to be considered of the Body. As far as I am concerned I will give of myself to my brother in what ever manner Yahweh desires, if it's giving him a bit of money, or helping to move furniture it is still service and I am glad to do it. It is after all more important to LOVE as Jesus loved than to be "correct" or to try to win out over your brother. This does not lend itself to fellowship but is very destructive, and in that regard the provoking of brothers and sisters of the body to merely provoke and stir up trouble is never a righteous pursuit and should never occur, because we do not function according to the world's standards but according to His, and this is another area where many "christians" fall short because they do not place the emphasis on being separate from the world and seem to think it's a minor point of Christ' but it is a major point with Him that He reiterates many times throughout the Gospels. If I am anything, I am His and I know whom I serve and I will follow Him to my own destruction if that is what I am called to. I love Him more than anything, and I may not understand all mysteries or prophecy as Paul did but I'm still learning and that is by His hand and His hand alone. I am glad that you brought up some of these things, and I hope that you have learned something from me as you have helped me to see a few things myself, but not in the way that you might think.

As far as the book goes, the reviewer seems to not hold to the Truth that we as Christians are grafted into Abraham's line, which means we are along side the Jews. It would appear that she is a replacement theologist and this in my mind completely discredits her, as the Word does not allow for the "church" to become a "spiritual" Israel but it does say that we are one Body Jew and Gentile alike. I have learned a great deal from The American Prophecies as far as the Jews place through our History and also in regards to the Arab hate for them. If you were to live in Palestine or Iran or any other Muslim ruled country you would be innundated with much of the same propoganda that the Nazis used to justify the killing of 6 million Jews. Is this something that Allah would approve of, according to the Quran it is something that is to be glorified and a "blessing". This is not the same God of Justice, Love, Righteousness, Honor, Holy, and Judgement. There god is a god of violence and hate, but there are those who exhibit a much different attitude, but even at 1% of 1 billion people that's still roughly 1 million people who want to kill you for being a Christian.

If you wish to discuss the "christian" wars then we can, but I can also tell you that the organization that was behind the crusades is no more "christian" than the muslims in which they killed. Again, it comes back to which Gospel is preached is it the Gospel of the NT or is it something perverse and man-made (look up info on how catholics are saved and compare it to what Jesus said was necessary: and I won't get into the issues of the "pope" or mary). A true believer in Jesus Christ could not have gone out and killed other people in His name, because it goes against who He was. He put the centurions ear back on his head after Peter had cut it off, but Jesus knew what lay ahead of Him and showed mercy to the centurion and to all of us with going to the Cross for our sins. And this is all very true, as it comes down to whether or not a person trully knows Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviorm and He even says you will know my children by the fruits they produce. His children would never manifest death and disease because it's not what He manifests and it is not what His LIFE manifests in us.

On another point what do you think of Jesus in the Temple when He ran out the money changers? What do you think of our "church" being run like a business with marketing schemes, and mass appeal? Isn't it the samething?

[Priapologist]

Millionman,

You sound as if you have the weight of the world on your shoulders and that you enjoy the load. I have no interest in damping your ardor for Christ or your zeal for spreading the message of salvation through Him, but I would remind you that Paul admonished the Galatians to demonstrate their faith through love. This means loving everyone, regardless of their faith. When you disparage people, you are not expressing love, or even discernment, but malice.

The Judaizers preached that no one could become a true Christian and receive salvation unless they first became a Jew. This is wrong, because it says that Christ was not enough. Some of the things that you say are in the same spirit as the Judaizers: you must be this, you can't be that, et cetera. Jesus said that all we need to do to be saved is to confess our sins and acknowledge Him as our Lord and Savior.

I am not "grafted into Abraham's line", figuratively or otherwise. I am a Gentile and I follow Christ under the New Covenant.

Peace, man. God loves you.

[millionman]

I'm going to disagree with you, as the replacement theolgy does not fit. The New Covenant does not void God's promise through the Old Covenant. It still stands, and if you would like to read articles by a Jew who also is a born again Christian and a prophetic minister go to howardmorganminsitries.org and he discusses this Biblical truth very concisely and with no mailice. What I am confused on from your end is why you seem to be ignoring the fact that if you're wrong, you're wrong (as far as following a false faith). This does not mean that I do not have love, it means that I will represent Jesus Christ and preach His word and it comes from a place of love. If I have not love then I am a resounding gong. You can not put me in the place of the judaizers as far as the NT is concerned. These were people (many were pharisees) who were trying to maintain their power and authority and preached a false gospel. Is this what I am doing? By no means. The reality is that the Jews are still god's chosen people, first and foremost, we as gentiles are offered the gift of being in His kingdom by the free gift of grace, and this is not to say that Jews are exempt from this as they too are elgible, but the essential Truth is that we are ingrafted into the tree of Abraham because we are accepted as joint heirs of Christ which would make us brothers (also friends) and as a brother of Christ who was a direct descendant of the house of David who also sprung from the line of Abraham. So this is very true and can not be disupted. We are all part of the same tree, which is also spoken of as a body as well as being taught as a tree that bears fruit.

What you call disparaging is mere presentation of fact. Paul went to the Greeks and spoke to them abou their idols and more specifically to the unknown god, would you not call this too to be disparaging to the greeks, but all Paul was doing was presenting the fact that what they were putting faith into had no power or authority and was no god at all, but that there was one true GOD on high and that His son died on the cross for the sins of all. So is this not a disparagement to their faith? Paul spoke very directly and to the point, and I do not mince words myself. I have reasoned and discussed the facts and presented the Truth in love, if I did not love I would have been quite and this thread more than likely would have been started by someone else, but because I am interested in the men on this board and their eternal spirits then that is LOVE my dear friend (said sincerely). You must see this before you ascribe me to being unloving and callous. I care greatly for the men on this board, and I have no other desire but to show the love of Christ (even though it is an internet forum with limited capacity to do so). It is clear to me that you mean well, but you have to take a step back and see if what you are saying goes along with His word and not merely interpretation or what you have been taught. This is the only way that we can come into an intimate place with Him is that we set aside our perspectives and opinions and let him lead the way. At one point in my walk I felt the way as you do, but because Yahweh is my rabbi I have learned a very different way and am being brought up by His hand, and this is how we all should seek to be (matthew 23:8-10 for reference). It's freedom Priapologist, and it is completely different when you escape man's system of doing things (living in the world as opposed to being of the world) and walk with Him hand in hand, and that is what will make you different than anyone else around you as it's not mere belief at that point (idea that jesus is cool and as a savior) to walking in FAITH (almighty, all sufficient, all powerful) and this is a paradigm shift in your flesh, in your soul, and in your spirit and it is a restored order to God's original plan that we would be born of the Spirit (which is God's life). A very good resource for this kind of teaching is Watchman Nee (as far as a philisophical approach). Jesus Christ is still above all of man's thoughts and man's perspectives but the Watchman was a man who lived out what he wrote (actually lived it before he wrote it), and he is a very solid resource of experience in this Life but he would never superceede Scripture. Blessings to you brother, and I pray that you will seek after Him whole heartedly and cling not to your life but the Life that Jesus Christ, Mat 16:25 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, and whoever will lose his life for my sake will find it.

[Priapologist]

What you call disparaging is mere presentation of fact.

What is factual about this:


My friend if you had any clue as to what the symbols of Islam mean and what they are connected to and what god they worship isn't a god it is satan.

?

Using your Abraham argument - need I remind you that Abraham was the father of both Isaac and Ishmael? If Ishmael's decendants worship the God of Abraham, which the stridently aver to do, then you're calling God/YHWH satan!? You're trying to have it both ways: Chastizing me for "replacement theology", but then saying that even though Christians and Jews are family, Muslims aren't.

[derringer57]

What is even more interesting is the fact "people of god" spread like a fucking plague, have caused millions of deaths, and they call me ignorant. I am an Odinist, and practice what my ancestors of nordic and celtic europe practiced. No christian can tell me to practice otherwise. I am just thankful you christians arent killing us pagans anymore. Um.. that was the crusades in the past, which were wars between two religions, not genocide.

Now lets see here. Stalin. Atheist. Killed Millions. Hitler. Atheist. Killed Millions. Pot Pol. Atheist killed millions. Mao Ze Tung. Atheist. Killed Millions. All within the last 100 years.

Ever heard of Samaratin's Purse or other nonprofit Christian organizations that go around the world (many times first on the sight) helping with relief efforts.

Ya well I have never heard of an atheistic organization, that even had a canned food drive...

[Kraft]

And what dogma does non-belief in a deity commit one to? None.
Atheism is not a religion, it is simply a lack of belief. Apart from that an atheist can hold any position. There are secular humanist organizations that try help people, but I don't think they are anywhere near as prolific as the Christian ones. I don't know why you'd expect huge atheist organizations to pop up, they are a minority, to which immorality, communism and many other traits that are looked down upon are attached. Most that I know of just keep it to themselves, and as it is not a positive claim and doesn't bring anything with it, people don't gather under a common umbrella.

Oh, and Hitler was a Catholic last I heard. Was a choir boy, referenced God in speaches, etc.

[millionman]

Priap, I'll find the original research done by men much more intelligent then you or I and they went back to around the 7th century and found that the Arab religion that would be come to be known as Islam was merely put in place to control and manipulate the people, as well as to join them under one banner of faith.

This is a bit of info from one of my sources:
"Islam's origins have been traced back by scholars to the ancient fertility religion of the worship of the moon god which was always the dominant religion of Arabia. The moon god was worshipped by praying toward Mecca several times a day, making an annual pilgrimage to the Kabah which was a temple of the moon god, running around the Kabah seven times, caressing an idol of a black stone set in the wall of the Kabah, running between two hills, making animal sacrifices, gathering on Fridays for prayers, giving alms to the poor, etc. These were pagan rites practiced by the Arabs long before Muhammad was born."

Again according to the Words of God Himself, if it is not worship of Him and only Him then it is pagan or Baal worship. Your assertion that because these two lines serve the same god is not based in fact. The reason for this if you were to look into the differences in the child of Promise who is Isaac and the son conceived in Sin that this is a very essential part of who they would come to be separately and as the origin of two ethnic groups. Ishmael hated Isacc because he received honor and praise because of what God accomplished by fulfilling His promise to Abraham, as well as being the favored son. This grudge led to a dissention between Ishmael and Isaac and led to Ishmael abandoning the God of his father and doing things according to his own standard and created his own form of worship, which many liken to of the apostacy and baal worship of the Jews in the book of Judges.

You took the above statment in the quoted text completely out of context as I was not stating that they served the same God as they do not, and this is quite clear. As I pointed out in the post previous to this that you can not make this assertion and assume it to be correct because of the teachings that come from the Quran do not fall in line with the character of El Shadei Adonai, but the character of satan, and this my friend can not be refuted. The two books in question in no way represent each other, one is a teaching of Love, generosity, justice, and Truth while the other teaches violence, hatred, and anger which resognates from the original blood feud. The Bible is very clear about second generation sin and curses that these are passed on from this generation to the next, as all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God this is not something that just is but is a curse passed onto us from Adam and Eve. If one was to deny this very simple truth and evidence to this reality then there would be no need for Christ to have died as sin was not something that could be inherited, but a choice made by the individual to go against God but this is not so as the Word is clear that all are born into sin.

Priap, the reality would be that all men are family. As we all have a common descendant at some point in time. The primary issue is not that these groups are family, but that they are not worshipping and in service to the same god as millions of people merely think this is so, but upon a dilligent study it becomes clear that the histories of these two groups are quite different. Have you ever noticed that the arabs always seem to be the first to attack. Why do you think this is? Are they not a peaceful people?

Read this if you would as another source http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/harris/031027
http://www.studytoanswer.net/myths_ch7.html
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/1590

I will say that I am going to look into different areas regarding this subject. It would be very easy to post articles and websites that agree with what I am saying. I have read a good bit of the Koran and it does call for the death of infidels and it is very hostile towards people of different faiths. It would be a very big mistake to think this is not true as it is quite clear in the book of which they base their lives.

I do think if you are to go through the above links you will begin to see a much different picture than is reported on the news and what is being pushed upon us as "fact". I have Arab friends and they are Christians who were former muslims and they have spoken to me about the way they were taught in schools to hate anyone outside of the "faith" and that they were trained to follow orders regardless of personal harm. It is authoritartian and manipulative at it's core, and it brings to mind the children in Germany and Japan who were sent to die on the front lines during WWII because it's what they were "supposed" to do, and this is a lie and has cost millions their lives, but now all of a sudden it's peaceful. History does not agree with this assertion and neither does the current climate in the middle east.

[millionman]

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2664

I like this article, and will probably buy a copy of the book. I do think that I am going to go the the library and see what kind of history I can dig up, especially before mohammad and during his reign. He was a ruler, as it appears to me that he did use his religion to control and laid down a series of laws in the hadith. I will look into this more extensiely. The last site linked to includes commentary from readers dissenting and supportive so it does well to represent not necessarily two sides of the argument but a good number of people who voice their opinions, similar to this place. I'll get back to this in a day or so and post about the history of the arabs pre and post islam and hopefully it won't be slanted one way or the other but facts, pure and simple.

[iwant8inches]

Damn, can I say damn in this thread? Can I get a good GOD! I'm only joking. But really I was a little shocked by the fact there's almost no information on Chirst in this thread.

[millionman]

There's plenty, go back a few pages...if I need to post more I can...but I've spent a good deal of time responding at length to earlier questions and presentations. I'm a bit on the tired side since school started back, but if I need to post more about Him and what He is really about then I surely will. Tell me what you want to know and I'll answer to the best of my ability and provide further sources in case you want them. Just let me know.

[Priapologist]

LOL! Man, can't you give me a straight answer? You write long paragraphs of opinions and reference a bunch of websites of other peoples opinions, but provide very little information.


Priap, I'll find the original research done by men much more intelligent then you or I...

Again, you're being presumptuous.


This is a bit of info from one of my sources:
"Islam's origins have been traced back by scholars to the ancient fertility religion of the worship of the moon god which was always the dominant religion of Arabia. The moon god was worshipped by praying toward Mecca several times a day, making an annual pilgrimage to the Kabah which was a temple of the moon god, running around the Kabah seven times, caressing an idol of a black stone set in the wall of the Kabah, running between two hills, making animal sacrifices, gathering on Fridays for prayers, giving alms to the poor, etc. These were pagan rites practiced by the Arabs long before Muhammad was born."

Are these the "symbols" that you keep talking about? Ancient Jews absorbed the oral traditions of precedant peoples and made them their own, even codifying these stories into the Torah. The story of Creation, the story of The Flood, and the dialog of Job, for example, all predate their 'assigned time' in Judeo history and derive from other, older cultures of the near and middle East. Early Christians absorbed the festivals and traditions of the 'pagans' who they sought to convert. What is your point?


Again according to the Words of God Himself, if it is not worship of Him and only Him then it is pagan or Baal worship. Your assertion that because these two lines serve the same god is not based in fact. The reason for this if you were to look into the differences in the child of Promise who is Isaac and the son conceived in Sin...

Sin? How, pray tell, was Ishmael's conception sinful?


...that this is a very essential part of who they would come to be separately and as the origin of two ethnic groups. Ishmael hated Isacc...

Where in the Bible does it say that Ishmael hated Isaac? According to the Bible, the worst thing Ishmael ever did was mock (who or what isn't specified).

Genesis 21:8-10
8The child (Isaac) grew and was weaned, and on the day Isaac was weaned Abraham held a great feast. 9But Sarah saw that the son (Ishmael) whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, 10and she said to Abraham, "Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac."


...because he received honor and praise because of what God accomplished by fulfilling His promise to Abraham, as well as being the favored son. This grudge led to a dissention between Ishmael and Isaac...

Again, how do you come to this conclusion? Show me one place in the Bible where Ishmael and Issac dissented.


...and led to Ishmael abandoning the God of his father...

Really? What Book and Chapter is that in?


...and doing things according to his own standard and created his own form of worship...

That being.... what? I see no mention of it in the Bible.


...which many liken to of the apostacy and baal worship of the Jews in the book of Judges.

Who are these "many" people? Do you have references?

I'm going to stop now, since I've demonstrated my point. If you would like to provide credible answers to my questions, please do, I'll read them. However, if you are going to keep writing unsubstantiated opinion, I won't be responding to it.

Peace.

[iwant8inches]

It was just a joke millionman. I've been reading. It's very interesting what you two are bringing to the table. I was poking fun at the misspelling of Christ in the thread's title.

[millionman]

WOW, I didn't even notice that....hmmmm...maybe one of the mods can edit the spelling.

It's one of those things on an internet forum you can't read tone of voice, so it may be a joke and meant as one but it is difficult to tell. I know that I sometimes read what I have written and it may seem angry or harsh, but it's never meant that way, and it is a difficult thing to try to include tone of voice and present a balanced and even tone through the written word.

[BazookaJoe]

And what dogma does non-belief in a deity commit one to? None.
Atheism is not a religion, it is simply a lack of belief. Apart from that an atheist can hold any position. There are secular humanist organizations that try help people, but I don't think they are anywhere near as prolific as the Christian ones. I don't know why you'd expect huge atheist organizations to pop up, they are a minority, to which immorality, communism and many other traits that are looked down upon are attached. Most that I know of just keep it to themselves, and as it is not a positive claim and doesn't bring anything with it, people don't gather under a common umbrella.

Oh, and Hitler was a Catholic last I heard. Was a choir boy, referenced God in speaches, etc.


Yes bravo Hitler in his youth grew up in a Catholic home and when he got older he was more of a Christain nationalist. Christains will denie this because they want to paint hilter as a evil Atheist and not a twisted religious person like Jim jones or George bush. Hitler also was into many occult practies.

Satlin was said to have some church affiliation too post ww2.( i think)

[BazookaJoe]

Well I read the bible and I've definitely read the alledged words of that christ that's in the bible and Jesus in my opinion a delusional and ambagious speaker.

In my hearts of heart I don't know why so many adults believe in him,he really didn't impress me at all.

[D&B]

Jesus was the Son of God. That does not mean he is God, though. Jesus stated many times over that he is not God, but rather that he is in a relationship (which requires two people) with God in the mood of a loving servant. That Jesus was God's only son does not make sense to me, if God didn't create me and everyone else, who did? Jesus was shaktivesa avatar, or an incarnation of the energy of God, just like Buddha was. Buddha was the 9th avatar of Vishnu. Jesus came, like many others, to show us how to engage in a pure loving relationship with God. That in no way implies that he is God, though. Jesus is guru, though, so if you serve and love him purely, he will bring you to God. And there is only one God; Jesus was His pure devotee, His pure servant simply carrying out His orders. Also there was writing in Sanskrit since time immemorial, and there are Sanskrit documents which date over 5200 years ago called the Vedas, from which many religions have sprung.


Finally someone who understand the the deeper lying messages of the prophets here to save our souls.

I believe that if he existed, he was an incarnation of the thing we call God.
But to give it names like that is arrogant, cause we not emotionally nor physiologically or psychologically even come close to understanding what the hell it is all about at this point.

The bible has some nice things yes, but thy the hell did they left out a lot of the important stuff ey.

Try to google for " teachings of Jesus" and find a whole nother story.

[cyberstar]

Jesus of Nazareth never existed .
if your willing to do some reading you'll find the story of jesus and everything about him
(25th dec , easter , virgin mother , son of god , walked on water , healer , the cross and all the rest) has been passed on to christianity from older religions like the egyptian religion where he was called horus and going back even farther to the sumarian religion where he was called tamos .
the same thing goes for the bible as a whole . anyone willing to look deep enough will realize the bible is just a kiddies version of the sumarian religious texts from a few thousand years previous.

[millionman]

Cyberstar, That's not accurate. The perpetrators of that myth have been proven incorrect on numerous occasions. People that spread that sort of lie usually have an agenda. Academic historians generally agree that a man named Jesus, from Nazareth, did indeed exist. Josephus, the Roman historian, is the most notable of records of his existence. It is thought that the inclusion of the markings, Jesus the Son of God, was later added to his original text but that's not 100%.

[cyberstar]

"Cyberstar, That's not accurate. The perpetrators of that myth have been proven incorrect on numerous occasions. People that spread that sort of lie usually have an agenda. Academic historians generally agree that a man named Jesus, from Nazareth, did indeed exist. Josephus, the Roman historian, is the most notable of records of his existence. It is thought that the inclusion of the markings, Jesus the Son of God, was later added to his original text but that's not 100%."

josephus's account was proven to be a forgery back in the 18 hundreds and since then there has been nothing thats turned up to prove him right .
as we all know or at least we should know the romans were very fond of rewriting history to show them in a good light or to obscure the truth if it went against them . (just look at what they write about the so called barbarians then go look at the archaeological evidence to see how much bs they really spat out )
what i can tell you is that the similarities between jesus and countless other deities is no myth thats for sure .
this character(jesus) pops up everywhere in all manner of religions . many after and many before christianity was ever dreamed up .
if it has indeed been proven to be a myth i'd like to see where this is written .
and i'd like to know who these academic historians are and how they can denie whats written in stone .(the story of horus for example is not up for debate )
the sumarian tablets can be disputed as there are only a very few who can translate them .
myself i dont understand what anyone would gain by giving false translations of the sumarian texts .
what would this so called agenda be ?
all i can think of is maybe to debunk the bible but why would anyone go through all that trouble when debunking the bible is as easy as looking up at the stars .

[millionman]

Cyberstar, Live it. That's all I can really say. If you feel strongly about what you're writing then live the way you choose and see how it turns out on the other side. There's no amount of typing on this forum that is going to change anyone's thoughts on who Jesus was or wasn't. In many respects I regret ever starting this thread, as it's really done very little good for anyone. This was actually started a LONG LONG time ago, and I have no idea how it keeps getting dug up from the MOS archives.

[REDZULU2003]

Bumping for any more insight into this long detailed old thread