The Jesus Christ Appreciation and Worship Thread

[regwec]

Is it your argument that proof is irrelevant to determining likelihood?

 

[The End]

edit

 

[Marvolo]

Yeah,the "everything you know is wrong" defense.The Gospels were written by eye witnesses for the most part.

Never said "everything you know is wrong" so dont put words in my mouth. I said Jesus didnt write anything and if he did we dont have it so Im not going to assume he said he was the son of god. And we dont have the original copies of the eyewitnesses words. We have copies of copies that were themselves copies. We in fact dont know what the original authors wrote about the man

 

[Apollo]

There are 1 billion things I do not know, and Only one thing I truly Know... Why people decided to make trouble in this thread... now makes that 1 billion and 1 things I do not know...

 

[Still Wynning]

Well, it got ugly in here really fast.

 

[Human Torch]

If you're going to play a game of pretending that the historicity of figures like Columbus, or Caeser, is equally comparable to Jesus, you're just not being intellectually honest and I'm not even going to entertain you on that.

Believe in Jesus if you want, fine, just don't be dishonest about it. It's about faith, its not about evidence.

There is as much evidence that Jesus existed.You're still trying to suggest otherwise is "not being intellectually honest".

 

[regwec]

Who's making trouble?

 

[regwec]

There is as much evidence that Jesus existed.You're still trying to suggest otherwise is "not being intellectually honest".

No there isn't.

 

[Human Torch]

Never said "everything you know is wrong" so dont put words in my mouth. I said Jesus didnt write anything and if he did we dont have it so Im not going to assume he said he was the son of god. And we dont have the original copies of the eyewitnesses words. We have copies of copies that were themselves copies. We in fact dont know what the original authors wrote about the man

The manuscript evidence is very sound.There has been many sources that corroborate each other.To suggest that some kind of wholesale changes were made is completely false.

 

[KevanG]

Quick question though: Since jesus doesn't say specifically that being gay is a sin, doesn't that mean homosexuality does not fit Jesus' definition of sin. He defines ALL sin as lack of love (Matthew 22:36-40).

Part of the OT that mentions it (Lev.) also mentions a number of other things that are supposed to be taken as seriously as homosexuality including, round haircuts, pork, not 'spilling seed' inside your partner when fornicating, tattoos, unnatural fabrics, divorce, wearing gold and eating shellfish. So who follows those to the letter?

 

[Marvolo]

There is as much evidence that Jesus existed.You're still trying to suggest otherwise is "not being intellectually honest".

There is enough proof to say that yes there was a man who lived back then who was crucified and inspired the story of Jesus, but that is all.

 

[Human Torch]

No there isn't.

Yes there is.Even the most hardened skeptics will admit to a historical Jesus.So you guys wanna still play that game,it'll only serve to make you out as obscurantists.

 

[The End]

edit

 

[Apollo]

Ok, in my opinion post #804 and #806 then every comment after and including post #815 should be deleted. Maybe a Moderator can help reel this thread back a bit? just an opinion from mister no body...

Edit: i'm getting my posts mixed up.. It must be hard being a Mod...

 

[The End]

edit

 

[The_Harvest]

Yes, I don't buy much of the rest of it. Like a lot of figures from ancient history, I think he was right about some things, wrong about others, but generally well meaning. As I said, he seems like a nice enough cat.

What is the correct context for preventing the stoning of women and refraining from judging others?

At least you're honest about this which is al the more puzzling

The context of the stoning women is that the man who wanted to stone here were hypocrites. According to the Law :If a man and a woman are caught in adultery both of the them should be stoned. They brought the woman but where was the man? They were convicted by their conscience which may imply that those same men where commiting the same thing that they accused the woman of doing (may it be physically or in their minds).

This also relates to judging. One of the favorite if not THE favorite verse of those that reject Christ is "Judge not lest ye be judge". They love to cite it whenever someone points out personal behavior.
But look at the verses that follow.
Matthew 7:2-5
For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

Again it referse to hypocrisy. In addition if you don't believe in Christ you're already judged.

John 3:18
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

As Christian we have to judge each others according to the Bible to avoid sin from taking over our lives or destroying our local churches.

1 Corinthians 5:1-3
5 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed

We all jugde each other on a daily basis; but most of the times we don't even notice it.

 

[Human Torch]

Quick question though: Since jesus doesn't say specifically that being gay is a sin, doesn't that mean homosexuality does not fit Jesus' definition of sin. He defines ALL sin as lack of love (Matthew 22:36-40).

Part of the OT that mentions it (Lev.) also mentions a number of other things that are supposed to be taken as seriously as homosexuality including, round haircuts, pork, not 'spilling seed' inside your partner when fornicating, tattoos, unnatural fabrics, divorce, wearing gold and eating shellfish. So who follows those to the letter?

This has been addressed dozens of times.Jesus was preaching to a prominently Jewish audience that would've found homosexuality an anathema.No need to preach against a sin people weren't committing.Paul under guidance of the Holy Spirit gives the case against homosexuality to the Romans,of whom it was a common sin.

The other regulations were by and large things to separate the Hebrew nation from the pagans.

 

[regwec]

Yes there is.Even the most hardened skeptics will admit to a historical Jesus.So you guys wanna still play that game,it'll only serve to make you out as obscurantists.

But you didn't say that. You said that there was as much evidence for Jesus as there was for Caeser. There isn't. There is a mass of material evidence for the lives of all the Caesers. As well as written evidence, their faces appear on coins and there are contemporary sculptures all over the Mediterranean. Jesus even supposedly referred to Caesar when talking about the morality of taxation. The census was supposedly an imperial edict.

So, no, there is not an equally of evidence for either figure. I would say that Jesus is more comparable with any number of religious profits.

 

[The End]

edit

 

[KevanG]

And why isn't it followed today? It's part of the bible. It's commanded to be done. Lev bans a huge amount of things from being eaten, so why isn't it enforced like other parts?

How many people are divorced? 'Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.'"

Tattoos? Leviticus 19:28 "You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord."

 

[The_Harvest]

I just don't think Paul is a trustworthy source, Harvest.

1 Corinthians 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

Isn't that very convenient for Paul?

Like a said before you don't believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God. What excatly do you want to argue about since you don't even believe the source? It's pointless really.

 

[The End]

edit

 

[The End]

edit

 

[Warhammer]

Many Christians like to be cafeteria Christians in that they will quote something from the Old Testament and then completely disregard something else in the Old Testament. In doing so, they disregard historical context and use a meaning to support a social norm instead of looking at the big picture of why the passage was even written.

 

[Apollo]

Remember, that this is not the atheist thread nor the Debate thread..

I noticed we have an athiest thread, but no thread to worship and praise Jesus Christ, only avenue for our salvation. I'd like to make this thread to dedication for Christians to speak about what Christ has done for them, share stories, post links to scripture, articles...anything to uplift the name of Jesus.

This is not meant to be a debate thread, but instead a Christ worship thread.

Thank you, and enjoy.

[YT]?v=CoxopsRSfdU[/YT]


Romans 5:8
King James Version (KJV)
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.