... and if you're wrong?

[Tumah]

What if the small handful of men on whose backs rest the entirety of Christianity were actually liars?

It seems to me that this is greater issue for Christianity that most other religions as Christianity rests almost entirely on the back of a previous code of law that directly commands not to have the very belief that Christianity requires. Unlike Islam which denies that there was a previous code of law different to itself, Christianity says, yes, there were laws that prohibited Christian belief, but those were changed.

And while the Jewish people point to an entire generation of ancestors who received this code of Law via Divine revelation, the Christian must rely on a handful of individuals who are said to have witnessed some miracles which convinced them that this original law had been uprooted.

I've sometimes seen Pascal's wager given as an argument to believe in Christianity. I may be biased, but it seems to me that based on Pastor Noel's words wagering on Christianity is already a pretty heavy risk.

Thoughts?

 

[74x12]

What if the small handful of men on whose backs rest the entirety of Christianity were actually liars?

View attachment 43145

It seems to me that this is greater issue for Christianity that most other religions as Christianity rests almost entirely on the back of a previous code of law that directly commands not to have the very belief that Christianity requires. Unlike Islam which denies that there was a previous code of law different to itself, Christianity says, yes, there were laws that prohibited Christian belief, but those were changed.

And while the Jewish people point to an entire generation of ancestors who received this code of Law via Divine revelation, the Christian must rely on a handful of individuals who are said to have witnessed some miracles which convinced them that this original law had been uprooted.

I've sometimes seen Pascal's wager given as an argument to believe in Christianity. I may be biased, but it seems to me that based on Pastor Noel's words wagering on Christianity is already a pretty heavy risk.

Thoughts?

As a Christian; I don't believe we should let our faith rest on words no matter how wise they may seem. If we really have the faith then we should see it in our lives. Because if God is real then He should be able to do the same things as He used to do. Then you'll know the power of God for yourself and won't need to have blind faith. Because Pascal's wager is all about blind faith. But I believe the faith that the scriptures teach is answered by God now in this life. Like in the Bible. David's faith was answered in his life. He had faith God would help him defeat Goliath and so it was. And that's how real faith works. And real faith is built up over time like how David began with a lion and bear and finally defeated a giant all by building up his faith in what God could do.

1 Corinthians 2:5
That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

As for the law being "uprooted" I don't know about that. Rather the difference was all between the earthly and the heavenly man. One is of this world the other is risen and has power with God in heaven. As Jesus said "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth"

So, because Jesus the Son of man is risen and sits on the right hand of the power of God. Therefore, He's not bound to earthly law anymore. The real law is now the one who raised Jesus from the dead. The Spirit or breath of the Almighty. Because when you think about it. Moses didn't need the law to serve God. He had the Spirit of God and so he served God before and after the law was given. Because God spoke to Moses Himself. And that's why Moses wished that God would pour out His Spirit on the whole nation of Israel so they would all prophecy and serve God. This wish of Moses would be granted as the prophet Joel says that God would pour out His Spirit on all flesh. Even the slaves. So, no longer would only the select few prophets have the Spirit of God. But the whole nation. And this has come to pass for those who follow Jesus Christ and worship God in "Spirit and in truth" as Jesus said.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

1. In my mind, and possibly in my mind only.... I do consider it quite plausible that God if he exists would frown on Christianity.

2. However, to give up Christianity if I was a Christian or even considering it or looking at it outside from it, and say that the Jewish people are correct... it'd be a much more difficult argument to sell me.

The first paragraph I stated would involve attacking away at the cohesive strengths when it comes to the evidence of Christianity. Then eventually we will get to questions of how to define God to begin with, etc.

The second paragraph, 2., involves saying "not this, but that" and making positive arguments proving not only for X faith, but also defining the ways it's valid while Y isn't.

 

[Tumah]

As a Christian; I don't believe we should let our faith rest on words no matter how wise they may seem. If we really have the faith then we should see it in our lives. Because if God is real then He should be able to do the same things as He used to do. Then you'll know the power of God for yourself and won't need to have blind faith. Because Pascal's wager is all about blind faith. But I believe the faith that the scriptures teach is answered by God now in this life. Like in the Bible. David's faith was answered in his life. He had faith God would help him defeat Goliath and so it was. And that's how real faith works. And real faith is built up over time like how David began with a lion and bear and finally defeated a giant all by building up his faith in what God could do.

1 Corinthians 2:5
That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

The problem with this argument is that, well, what if it's not only Christians who see the effects of having faith in their lives? If that's the case, and a quick Google search will demonstrate that it is, then faith, or the effects of it on the Christian life, ceases to be a proof for the religion.

As for the law being "uprooted" I don't know about that. Rather the difference was all between the earthly and the heavenly man. One is of this world the other is risen and has power with God in heaven. As Jesus said "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth"

So, because Jesus the Son of man is risen and sits on the right hand of the power of God. Therefore, He's not bound to earthly law anymore. The real law is now the one who raised Jesus from the dead. The Spirit or breath of the Almighty. Because when you think about it. Moses didn't need the law to serve God. He had the Spirit of God and so he served God before and after the law was given. Because God spoke to Moses Himself. And that's why Moses wished that God would pour out His Spirit on the whole nation of Israel so they would all prophecy and serve God. This wish of Moses would be granted as the prophet Joel says that God would pour out His Spirit on all flesh. Even the slaves. So, no longer would only the select few prophets have the Spirit of God. But the whole nation. And this has come to pass for those who follow Jesus Christ and worship God in "Spirit and in truth" as Jesus said.

Everything you wrote here is just a matter of perspective. If Christianity is wrong as in the OP hypothetical, then what you wrote here is also wrong. So it's not really relevant and also doesn't address the brunt of my second point at all, which was in the stark difference in nature between the first revelation and the one that was supposed to change the status quo.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I guess a problem is, that the picture gets bigger if you step back even farther than that. Lately I've been thinking about the weirdness of various ancient peoples in framing great gods as 'trickster gods.' Rather than being free from the ability to manipulate language and the truth, these divine forces were seen as fully mutable. In other words, they could change the truth and change forms, and therefore man shouldn't trust them to obey the constants that they attribute to them, or that the gods attribute to themselves. I respect the God of the Levant as a powerful god, who wished to expand his territory, but not without manipulating himself into a variety of forms in order to accomplish this. In this sense, he must be making use of the 'trickster' attribute which many ancient peoples attributed to divine forces, as these ancient peoples were not naive about the powerful ability of gods to perform radical form shifts

 

[Lyndon]

What if the small handful of men on whose backs rest the entirety of Christianity were actually liars?

View attachment 43145

It seems to me that this is greater issue for Christianity that most other religions as Christianity rests almost entirely on the back of a previous code of law that directly commands not to have the very belief that Christianity requires. Unlike Islam which denies that there was a previous code of law different to itself, Christianity says, yes, there were laws that prohibited Christian belief, but those were changed.

And while the Jewish people point to an entire generation of ancestors who received this code of Law via Divine revelation, the Christian must rely on a handful of individuals who are said to have witnessed some miracles which convinced them that this original law had been uprooted.

I've sometimes seen Pascal's wager given as an argument to believe in Christianity. I may be biased, but it seems to me that based on Pastor Noel's words wagering on Christianity is already a pretty heavy risk.

Thoughts?

And if you're wrong then you rejected your Messiah, two can play at this game!!

 

[Samantha Rinne]

What if the small handful of men on whose backs rest the entirety of Christianity were actually liars?

View attachment 43145

It seems to me that this is greater issue for Christianity that most other religions as Christianity rests almost entirely on the back of a previous code of law that directly commands not to have the very belief that Christianity requires. Unlike Islam which denies that there was a previous code of law different to itself, Christianity says, yes, there were laws that prohibited Christian belief, but those were changed.

And while the Jewish people point to an entire generation of ancestors who received this code of Law via Divine revelation, the Christian must rely on a handful of individuals who are said to have witnessed some miracles which convinced them that this original law had been uprooted.

I've sometimes seen Pascal's wager given as an argument to believe in Christianity. I may be biased, but it seems to me that based on Pastor Noel's words wagering on Christianity is already a pretty heavy risk.

Thoughts?

But Jesus is not man.

He is God With(in) Us. He is God who so loved the world that he took human form, was born, and died so that he could become part of humanity (I don't agree with atonement theory). This is what the Body of Christ represents, that Christ is in each member of the Church. We are not worshipping Jesus the historical figure, but Jesus the numinous and immanent who pervades humanity yet transcends our petty natures.

Those who deny Christianity understand very little of it, for they have never met Jesus.

I learned about the difference between Judaism and Christianity working at Amazon. The Law of the Jews was like our picking quota. No matter how I tried, it was never enough. I soon found I had bulk orders of 100 tiny objects or 20 slightly larger ones, and I had to exactly count everything. But I was also timed. There was no way that I could on my own merit satisfy the Law. Then it got worse. After Christmas, I was switched to stowing, and found rules after rules about neatness in the bin, none of which I could keep straight, and even if I understood, either the bins were too full or I'd try to shove a bunch of small objects in, and they'd decide this wasn't allowed. This is the Law.
Yet this same place also had Grace. I met a girl there, and while talking to her, I felt a sense of connection. Somehow this didn't count against my quota, despite quite a few times of meeting her and chatting.

Bottom line, the world Judaism offers is unfortunately only slightly better than the secular world. Its burdens can never be met. But God is part of us, and through our religion we can reconnect.

 

[rational experiences]

When science as a scientist and a male and just a group of males as humans who first quote we A GREED with our own thinking. Using coercive human worded information.

Natural and natural mass and natural conditions are always first. So humans quote we are the highest self and most conscious, were never lying.

That human group coercive status is lived today as it was before, just males who can agree in groups and then argue as a group purpose. Yet everyone is just a natural human first, owning all states in natural mass that are natural.

Science unlike the bio life does not support our living conditions of a balanced microbiome life whose bodily forms, self present are each formed, own an end, being the highest form, presence. As it was scientific taught. Natural and we were taught we lived "with God". A theme about God, a natural planet, its own entity that owned its own stone heavenly spirits.

A teaching of relativity. If stone owns its own gas spirit heavens then there is no cosmological reasoning about any other laws.....as a rational thinker.

Then you quote, if an irrational thinker first agreed on a thesis for science and invention in a reactive cause when no life was living on Earth, then it was irrational to have made that choice. And it was made by the highest life form of human self, healthy and natural.

Who then irradiated self, by ground sealed radiation release, seeing the natural stone fused God Earth history is not any Sun history, for the 2 bodies in space are completely reactive different. Yet that Sun body converted the Earth. Scientific relativity advice to a researching mind. Sun radiation in a heated state consumes/converts and reacts the Earth God body. Science.

How is that not simply expressed and explained that you were proven wrong about your idea of being self transported back into just being a spirit and not a living bio life? For you used self presence of inference as the thinker of that theory....having the stone upon which you stand converted and removed?

To then realise, oh he theorises about the mountain above his head. Did he really believe he would be safe? To then knowingly study and see where the science cause UFO mass Ark hit the stone mountain, converted its mass, melted the mass and blew up his Temple. For he was not doing mass presence science, he was applying a non physical science condition, radiation and radio waves.

God the stone and Earth body always owned the mass in natural spatial history.

So we then were brain burnt irradiated and our chemical mind behaviours became depraved. For it was real. How does an irradiated, yet saved life mind then try to contemplate information to teach others who owned the imbalanced thinking and depraved secreted mentality that they were wrong?

They actually depended on a spiritual brotherhood to deal with him. For surely anyone today would know that if some of the scientists were given a psychological examination, how they feel and think about humanity and life would cause you not to employ them? And what about the human male choice to own such science designed acts of destruction? Not logical in reality, already seen as not a logical choice.

To then ask why a spiritual life would have supported its gain, and then the radiation condition, metal cooling that attacked and harmed our life, our possession, in actuality of its reasoning.

Who today can review natural history and quote....I was a rational life and mind in the past as compared to you all today, yet we quote, life went into the Dark Ages as we inherited spatial radiation fall out put there by ground conversions. Earth moved through the same cycle where science had irradiated space.

How could common sense and personal behaviour be overcome when so many of the same like minds existed in the same forms of expressed beliefs?

We could only change by evolution of the personal self.

Today in modern day life right at this moment is where any of us now exists. We all know that incorrect historical choices of the past is why any wrong today is expressed in our human life. And yet a lot of humanity claim that today they strive for a world community of spiritual alike minds to save us.

Therefore like I learnt put aside your own personal anger and historical hatred before it is too late and stop blaming any particular brother or organisation and take action on behalf of everyone as a united human family member for human is the highest order in life on Earth.

 

[MNoBody]

What if the small handful of men on whose backs rest the entirety of Christianity were actually liars?

View attachment 43145

It seems to me that this is greater issue for Christianity that most other religions as Christianity rests almost entirely on the back of a previous code of law that directly commands not to have the very belief that Christianity requires. Unlike Islam which denies that there was a previous code of law different to itself, Christianity says, yes, there were laws that prohibited Christian belief, but those were changed.

And while the Jewish people point to an entire generation of ancestors who received this code of Law via Divine revelation, the Christian must rely on a handful of individuals who are said to have witnessed some miracles which convinced them that this original law had been uprooted.

I've sometimes seen Pascal's wager given as an argument to believe in Christianity. I may be biased, but it seems to me that based on Pastor Noel's words wagering on Christianity is already a pretty heavy risk.

Thoughts?

to everything in its season, everything turns and transforms, like the sound of the shofar going up and down.
one rabbi called it a necessary idolatry, necessary in a particular context of some greater plan of hashem that is still unfolding and is unknown until it becomes......but then such ideas are as plentiful as the seats around the table at times.

 

[sun rise]

A member of one religion finds reasons from the framework of that religion to question another religion. Queue the "blind men and the elephant".

For the sincere, all religions are paths to the Divine. People should walk their path and let others walk the paths or pathless path of their choosing

 

[rational experiences]

to everything in its season, everything turns and transforms, like the sound of the shofar going up and down.
one rabbi called it a necessary idolatry, necessary in a particular context of some greater plan of hashem that is still unfolding and is unknown until it becomes......but then such ideas are as plentiful as the seats around the table at times.

Human males who own by group control and choices to destroy all life on Earth.

Egotism, quotes self idolisation, to sacrifice the male life is considered in their psyche to be a holy act and a condition of living. Constantly self taught, the highest holiest life is the life sacrificed. Male mentality taught/gained constant.

Only believe that the life of a sacrificed male is the highest.

Hence the teaching of consciousness was involved, spiritual idealism. No man is God and hence do not give God by defined male reasoning a name, to own science change and unnatural sacrifice of our life.

Why humans who did not believe in indoctrination could challenge the ideal of self idolisation, for we knew by natural spiritual living conditions that to sacrifice human life was an act of self living conditions being removed.

How humans who did not identify with these teachings tried to fight for human equality and mutual acceptance.

 

[Tumah]

And if you're wrong then you rejected your Messiah, two can play at this game!!

There's no significant loss in Judaism for rejecting a Messiah. Our requirements remain the same regardless.

 

[Tumah]

But Jesus is not man.

He is God With(in) Us. He is God who so loved the world that he took human form, was born, and died so that he could become part of humanity (I don't agree with atonement theory). This is what the Body of Christ represents, that Christ is in each member of the Church. We are not worshipping Jesus the historical figure, but Jesus the numinous and immanent who pervades humanity yet transcends our petty natures.

Those who deny Christianity understand very little of it, for they have never met Jesus.

I learned about the difference between Judaism and Christianity working at Amazon. The Law of the Jews was like our picking quota. No matter how I tried, it was never enough. I soon found I had bulk orders of 100 tiny objects or 20 slightly larger ones, and I had to exactly count everything. But I was also timed. There was no way that I could on my own merit satisfy the Law. Then it got worse. After Christmas, I was switched to stowing, and found rules after rules about neatness in the bin, none of which I could keep straight, and even if I understood, either the bins were too full or I'd try to shove a bunch of small objects in, and they'd decide this wasn't allowed. This is the Law.
Yet this same place also had Grace. I met a girl there, and while talking to her, I felt a sense of connection. Somehow this didn't count against my quota, despite quite a few times of meeting her and chatting.

Bottom line, the world Judaism offers is unfortunately only slightly better than the secular world. Its burdens can never be met. But God is part of us, and through our religion we can reconnect.

A. It doesn't look like you understood the OP. You're not addressing it, in any case.
B. You're a liar. You didn't learn about the difference between Judaism and Christianity. You learned the difference between Christianity and Christian beliefs about Judaism.

 

[Tumah]

to everything in its season, everything turns and transforms, like the sound of the shofar going up and down.
one rabbi called it a necessary idolatry, necessary in a particular context of some greater plan of hashem that is still unfolding and is unknown until it becomes......but then such ideas are as plentiful as the seats around the table at times.

You are mis-paraphrasing Maimonides.

 

[MNoBody]

You are mis-paraphrasing Maimonides.

tis been over decade since these studies, what was the accurate rendition?

 

[Tumah]

A member of one religion finds reasons from the framework of that religion to question another religion.

I don't think that's a valid argument in this case, since the second religion sees the first religious framework as having been valid until it came around. That means there had to have been a valid argument within the framework of the first religion to validate the second religion's birth, otherwise the second religion can't claim a connection to it.

 

[Tumah]

tis been over decade since these studies, what was the accurate rendition?

He's actually explaining that although Christianity has been a terrible plague for the Jewish people, it as well as Islam have the positive benefit of spreading montheism and basic knowledge of the Torah to the world, so that when the Jewish Messiah does come, people will have some background to understand what's going on.

 

[Brickjectivity]

What if the small handful of men on whose backs rest the entirety of Christianity were actually liars?

If Christians are reasonably humble about things it should ameliorate most problems. Do we realize it, though?

It seems to me that this is greater issue for Christianity that most other religions as Christianity rests almost entirely on the back of a previous code of law that directly commands not to have the very belief that Christianity requires. Unlike Islam which denies that there was a previous code of law different to itself, Christianity says, yes, there were laws that prohibited Christian belief, but those were changed.

And while the Jewish people point to an entire generation of ancestors who received this code of Law via Divine revelation, the Christian must rely on a handful of individuals who are said to have witnessed some miracles which convinced them that this original law had been uprooted.

I've sometimes seen Pascal's wager given as an argument to believe in Christianity. I may be biased, but it seems to me that based on Pastor Noel's words wagering on Christianity is already a pretty heavy risk.

Thoughts?

I was able to find an online commentary by that author, mid 19th century. He was not happy about the Church of England and in particular didn't like infant baptism. This was a man who felt he could determine, from scripture, what baptism ought to be and was heavily into denouncing other people and institutions. You need not look these up but I provide them as references: (2Peter 2:11-12 is about people who blaspheme things they don't understand), (Jude 1:8 rebukes people who reject authority and heap abuse onto celestial beings), (James 3:10 blessing God incompatible with cursing men). So on the one hand he accuses the Church of England of unscriptural practice, but he doesn't seem familiar with scripture for himself. We owe him no allegiance.

The Views on Baptism of ... B. W. Noel. From His Essay “On the Union of the Church and State.”

In the document you've presented this person writes enthusiastically that Jesus must be absolutely divine or an idol. He places ignorant kitchen wives into a difficult position, doesn't he? Here he is telling us that we haven't been practicing our religion right, that we aren't fervent enough, that we have brought upon ourselves all kinds of trouble. He's getting a reaction out of us. He's brow-beating us and making us feel like we're ignorant fools. He's telling us that if we don't swallow a particular version of Jesus that we are calling Jesus and his men liars. It is an unfair gambit and manipulative. For similar reasons I dislike C.S. Lewis and Josh McDowell.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Thoughts?

I have lots of thoughts, I assume you know where they are sourced from.

As that was the only question, I would offer that Jesus offered that in these days Christianity would be on shaky ground.

Regards Tony

 

[MNoBody]

He's actually explaining that although Christianity has been a terrible plague for the Jewish people, it as well as Islam have the positive benefit of spreading montheism and basic knowledge of the Torah to the world, so that when the Jewish Messiah does come, people will have some background to understand what's going on.

that is pretty much just a slight revision of what i said though.
but thanks.