Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
my only obligation was to tell you. nothing is said about making you believeThis says nothing as it's not scripture to me.
I'm aware. No-one in the world needs telling about Christianity. We know it.my only obligation was to tell you. nothing is said about making you believe
what you have likely seen are the paganized version that call them selves Christion … so lacking in true understanding they are . so filled with idle worship and self pleasingI'm aware. No-one in the world needs telling about Christianity. We know it.
I used to be a Christian and have talked to the Witnesses. I've also spoken to them on here. I believe the whole concept of Christianity is wrong because I do not believe the Messiah has come.what you have likely seen are the paganized version that call them selves Christion … so lacking in true understanding they are . so filled with idle worship and self pleasing
No true Christian, huh?what you have likely seen are the paganized version that call them selves Christion … so lacking in true understanding they are . so filled with idle worship and self pleasing
Define "historic Christianity." I'm still very well informed and knowledgeable on church history, and that it's largely only deniable if you're an idiot. However, dead people returning to life, turning water into wine, walking on water, supernatural events like those are easily dismissable.
when 1+1+1=1 then yes there is a problemNo true Christian, huh?
My guess is that if we don't convert, we will burn in hell forever. Caring is sharing, as they say.I find it strange that many Christians do not agree to disagree with Jews about whether or not Jesus is the Messiah.
Why can't we agree to disagree?
Oh.My guess is that if we don't convert, we will burn in hell forever. Caring is sharing, as they say.
Look I understand that you are posting these for me to read and you are doing so in good faith, but could you just type a basic answer for me? I'm already very familiar with your and other Christian arguments as I was a Christian most of my life. I think it would just be easier for both of us if you could just give a simpler answer because I'm not new to your understanding.
No, because David wrote this Psalms for other people to sing. First the Temple priests and by extension Temple worshipers. So, yes, this Psalm is about its singers proclaiming that David is our master and sits at the right hand of HaShem.I can agree that the lord means master, or something else than God. But, I think it is in no way reasonable to claim that it means David, because then David would be saying: “Yahweh says to my me, …”.
Did you notice you capitalized “Master”? Why? There is no capital in the Hebrew. Do you recognize you are doing the same as Christian translators of the TaNaKh by forcing an implication that this must be about a something more than a man? IOW you are adding to the scripture something not there.I am confused again....Psalm 110 is David speaking and saying that Yahweh said to his Master, sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as your footstool”.
To us David’s ‘Master’ is Jesus, a human son of God who was to give his life to atone for Adam’s sin so that his children could be redeemed, having been thrust into captivity to sin and death through no fault on their part. Adam was also a sinless son of God at his creation....so Adam’s life was lost due to his disobedience.....Jesus’ sinless life was given in exchange for Adam’s. It was the ransom price demanded for the release of many captives.
.
Sir, symbolic or not, it's still cannibalism. It's horrific. Listen to yourself talk. You are saying that God condones symbolic cannibalism!!! If that isn't strange, I don't know what is. when you think about it, doesn't it bother you just a tiny little bit?There's a good number of errant suppositions in those. For instance, the Lord's Supper is not cannibalism. No one is eating real flesh. It's symbolic.
Sir, symbolic or not, it's still cannibalism. It's horrific. Listen to yourself talk. You are saying that God condones symbolic cannibalism!!! If that isn't strange, I don't know what is. when you think about it, doesn't it bother you just a tiny little bit?
Because I believe God is up in arms. He finds things such as cannibalism repulsive to him. Why would cannibalism be a sin but symbolic cannibalism be okay? It makes no sense. Very strange indeed.Doesn't bother me a bit. Why are you up in arms, LOL?
It is proper form that you attempt to answer the question I asked. Citing sources is to back you claims up, not throw them out first and solely and expect someone to read all that when you could summarize in a paragraph or two the definition that was requested.Do your homework and leave your bias at home.
Because you're eating god. Even symbolically, you're eating god. You chew his flesh, you drink his blood.Doesn't bother me a bit. Why are you up in arms, LOL?
No, because David wrote this Psalms for other people to sing. First the Temple priests and by extension Temple worshipers. So, yes, this Psalm is about its singers proclaiming that David is our master and sits at the right hand of HaShem.
Did you notice you capitalized “Master”? Why? There is no capital in the Hebrew. Do you recognize you are doing the same as Christian translators of the TaNaKh by forcing an implication that this must be about a something more than a man? IOW you are adding to the scripture something not there.
Yes, I understand Christian interpret this as a reference to Jesus. But that is because they read it with “New Testament” colored glasses. A non-tortured, plain reading of the text doesn’t point to Jesus at all.