• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Question for Christianity

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
Jerrell said:
...it is not up to you to decide whether my answers are substantial or not, that is up to God, He is my Judge, do not presume to be mine.
Sorry if you thought i was judging you, wasn't my intention, i mearly meant that the nature of your answers, being derived from faith, won't satisfy many of the people who post a question here.

Jerrell said:
I do not however read my own meaning into certain texts, and ignore others
Forgive me, but this example tells a very different story;
Jerrell said:
However, Acts 1:18-19 is symbolic, it means that Judas will die, and be burst ashunder spiritually, and the Field, is not really a field, but his Bishoprick, his office, namely, being an Apostle shall be given to another (Acts 1:20).
It seems to me that you have converted its meaning into a spiritual one simply because it contradicts Matthew's version of events.
 

Jerrell

Active Member
We need to stop looking at the Inconsistances, and look at the consistant.

Stop looking at the bad and look at the good

Stop looking at the false and look at the truth.

Many times we focus on what's flase about a claim, even Issac Newton, the World's so far, Brightest mind, was proven wrong about "light" being a particle, when it is actually not a particle, nor a wave, but characteristic of both.

What Prophecy do I speak on?

The Book of Daniel was written 500 years before the birth of Jesus. In Chapter 9, Daniel predicts the very day that the Messiah would enter Jerusalem and present himself as king for the first time. The prophecy states that 69 weeks of years (69 x 7 = 483 years) would pass from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem until the coming of the Messiah. 3 Since Daniel was written in Babylon during the Jewish captivity after the fall of Jerusalem, this prophecy was based on the Babylonian 360-day calendar. Thus, 483 years x 360 days = 173,880 days.

According to records found in the Shushan (Susa) Palace, and confirmed in Nehemiah 2:1, the decree to rebuild Jerusalem was issued by the Persian king, Artaxerxes Longimanus, on March 5, 444 BC. Remarkably, 173,880 days later (adjusting for leap years), on March 30, 33 AD, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (fulfilling the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9).4 Five days later, Jesus was crucified on a Roman cross just outside Jerusalem. (Actually, the form of his execution and even his last words were foretold hundreds of years earlier in Psalm 22.) Three days later, the New Testament accounts declare that Jesus rose from the dead on Easter Sunday, fulfilling numerous other prophecies of the long-awaited Messiah.

Here are just a Few Other Prophecies about Jesus

1) He will ride into Jerusalem on a *** (Zec 9:9) Fulfilled (Matthew 21:1-5) [Also note, that only the two Apostles wrote about this instance, that gives supporting evidence to authenticy].

2) They shall look upon Jesus who they Pierced (Zec 12:10) Fullfilled:(John 19:34-36)

3) Jesus would be buried in a Rich man's grave (Isa 53:9) Fulfilled: (John 19:40-42)
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Jerrell said:
The Book of Daniel was written 500 years before the birth of Jesus.
Unless, of course, it wasn't ...
The dating and authorship of Daniel has been a matter of great debate. The traditional view holds that the work was written by a prophet named Daniel who lived during the sixth century BC. Alternative modern views maintain that the book was written or redacted in the mid-second century BC and that most of the "predictions" of the book refer to events that had already occurred. ...

Certain statements in Daniel are considered to be in conflict with other historical accounts. This is one reason why some modern historians of Babylonia or Achaemenid Persia do not adduce the narratives of Daniel as source materials. Other reasons for reservations are given in Dating below.

The four objections given below represent, in order of significance, the major instances of error historians generally find in Daniel. ... [Wikipedia]
Those interested are encouraged to read the remainder of the Wikipedia entry.
 

JerryL

Well-Known Member
According to records found in the Shushan (Susa) Palace, and confirmed in Nehemiah 2:1, the decree to rebuild Jerusalem was issued by the Persian king, Artaxerxes Longimanus, on March 5, 444 BC. Remarkably, 173,880 days later (adjusting for leap years),
This doesn't make sense. You are counting days and adjusting for leap years (which don't exist on the Babylonian calander).

It was either 173,880 days or it was not.

The problems with this passage are discussed in detail on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy_of_Seventy_Weeks#Fulfillment

on March 30, 33 AD, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (fulfilling the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9).4 Five days later, Jesus was crucified on a Roman cross just outside Jerusalem. (Actually, the form of his execution and even his last words were foretold hundreds of years earlier in Psalm 22.) Three days later, the New Testament accounts declare that Jesus rose from the dead on Easter Sunday, fulfilling numerous other prophecies of the long-awaited Messiah.
Prove that either of these two events actually happend.


Actually, here's an easier one. Prove outside the Bible that Yesua bin Yoseph actually existed as an historical figure (obviously, being able to independatly verify that he performed some act would establish his existance).

You'll find that you cannot. There is no phyiscal record, and no contemporary historical record outside the writings of the Bible, several of whom directly admit to not being witnesses. It's entirely likely that Jesus didn't even exist, it's certainly beyond the ability of the historical record to validate your claims here.

Let me state this catigorically after many years of challenging Christians to prove it wrong. The Bible makes NO specific extraordinary predictions where it can be proven both that the event occured and that the prediction was made before the event. None.
 

logician

Well-Known Member
The gospels(written by unknown authors much later than the supposed time of Christ) were stories invented from pre-existence tradition and philosophy. IN many cases attempts were made to "fulfull" OT prophecies, even though those prophecies really were not meant for that day and time.
 

reyjamiei

Member
Jerrell said:
Good Question. The Gospels were written by Two Apostles, Matthew and John, and by two of Paul's companions, Luke and John Mark. Matthew was written to the Jews, Mark for Everyone, John to everyone and Luke to the Gentiles.

The Gospel of John was written by Lazarus. The author of the book never gives his name but often refers to himself as the disciple whom Jesus loved (John13:23, John19:26, John 20:2, John 21:7, John 21:20; and in John 11:2-4 we find out who Jesus loved.



John 11:2 (It was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick.)
John 11:3 Therefore his sisters sent unto him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick.
John 11:4 When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
reyjamiei said:
The Gospel of John was written by Lazarus. The author of the book never gives his name but often refers to himself as the disciple whom Jesus loved (John13:23, John19:26, John 20:2, John 21:7, John 21:20; and in John 11:2-4 we find out who Jesus loved.



John 11:2 (It was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick.)
John 11:3 Therefore his sisters sent unto him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick.
John 11:4 When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.
I've often thought that the Gospel of John implied that the author was indeed Lazarus, i mentioned it a couple of times here to immediate rebuking.
We do have further "evidence" at the end of the Gospel John 21:20-23;

Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, "Lord, who is going to betray you?") When Peter saw him, he asked, "Lord, what about him?"
Jesus answered, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me." Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?"
It seems a strange thing to say "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?", unless you look at it in the context that it is Lazarus being spoken of, a man risen from the dead - then it makes a little more sense.

However, the fact that the author goes to such great lengths to conceal their identity, referring to themselves as "the beloved disciple" instead of using a name implies, to me anyway, that the author wanted to remain anonymous - possibly even to suggest that the beloved disciple is the reader not the author.

Also, scholarly analysis of the text has often suggested that there were several authors of John, who rewrote, added too and edited the text over the course of several years.
 

kellyjaz

Member
Hello, Thank you for making this great thread btw.:monkey:


I was wondering, if Jesus will save us from our sins, Does that mean we are all free to do as we please, and later we can ask Jesus and God for forgiveness?
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
kellyjaz said:
Hello, Thank you for making this great thread btw.:monkey:


I was wondering, if Jesus will save us from our sins, Does that mean we are all free to do as we please, and later we can ask Jesus and God for forgiveness?
You ask ten Christians this question and you're likely to get ten different answers. Here's mine:

The gospel of Jesus Christ requires that each of us recognize that we need a "Savior," that we are, as individuals, incapable of attaining the state of perfect righteousness God expects of those who wish to return to His presence. We come, though faith, to accept that Jesus Christ is the only individual who has ever lived to have led a perfect life. Because His goodness is infinite, He alone was in a position to be able to offer Himself as a sacrifice to atone for the sins of all mankind.

In order to take advantage of this gift, we need to have faith in His ability to accomplish what we cannot to for ourselves. We then need to be sincerely repentent of the sins, both large and small, we may have committed up to that time. We need to have a sincere desire to do better in the future; we need to have a firm resolve not to repeat our sins of the past. We then enter into a covenant relationship with Him through the ordinance of baptism. According to the terms of this covenant, we are promised that if we continue to do our best to live righteously, repenting time and time again as necessary, we will be granted forgiveness and welcomed into God's kingdom. After we are baptised, we are given the gift of the Holy Ghost. This is a guarantee that, provided we do our best to keep God's commandments, we will have a member of the Godhead to be our constant companion. He will sustain and comfort us in times of trial and will guide us as we are comfronted by temptations.

In order to sincerely say that we have faith in Christ, we need to be faithful to Him. We are bound to make mistakes from time to time, but the terms of of covenant with Jesus Christ will enable us to continue to improve over time and become more like Him as we grow in our faith in Him and understanding of His gospel. In the end, God knows the condition of our hearts. He is fully aware of the extent to which we sincerely tried to be obedient and faithful.
 

kellyjaz

Member
Thanks for the replay. It was helpful.

if you or any other member has time i have another question.
What does christianity and jesus say about other religions?
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
kellyjaz said:
Thanks for the replay. It was helpful.

if you or any other member has time i have another question.
What does christianity and jesus say about other religions?
Love your neighbour as yourself.

There are no if's or but's to this rule, Christians are supposed to love everyone regardless of race, creed or religion - and love, by its very nature, includes respect.

So, Christians must respect their neighbours and their religious decisions.
 

JerryL

Well-Known Member
The gospel of Jesus Christ requires that each of us recognize that we need a "Savior," that we are, as individuals, incapable of attaining the state of perfect righteousness God expects of those who wish to return to His presence. We come, though faith, to accept that Jesus Christ is the only individual who has ever lived to have led a perfect life. Because His goodness is infinite, He alone was in a position to be able to offer Himself as a sacrifice to atone for the sins of all mankind.
And I've never seen good reason to accept any of these assertions as true.

So, Christians must respect their neighbours and their religious decisions.
I don't agree that this is a position consistant with Biblical teachings.

Firstly, I don't agree that all people respect themselves. Secondly, I don't agree that love and respect are synonymous, and thirdly I don't agree that respecting a person means acceptance of all of their decisions.

Further, if the same God inspired both testments, certainly the Jewesh law to slay anyone preaching a foreign religion would imply that God did not wish you to respect that choice.
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
JerryL said:
I don't agree that this is a position consistant with Biblical teachings.
Maybe not the OT, but you don't need to believe in the OT to be a Christian.
JerryL said:
Firstly, I don't agree that all people respect themselves. Secondly, I don't agree that love and respect are synonymous, and thirdly I don't agree that respecting a person means acceptance of all of their decisions.
I don't think i said anything about all people respecting themselves. I disagree that love and respect aren't intimately linked. If you don't respect someone for who they are, then you can't really love them - you're just tolerating them.
I didn't say love involved respecting all decisions made, i said religious decisions - decisions about who they want to be and what they want to believe.
JerryL said:
Further, if the same God inspired both testments, certainly the Jewesh law to slay anyone preaching a foreign religion would imply that God did not wish you to respect that choice.
You don't need to believe in the OT to be a Christian
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Jerrell said:
Matthew was written to the Jews, Mark for Everyone, John to everyone and Luke to the Gentiles.
I thought Mark was written for the Romans, and Luke to the Greek-speaking people of Eastern Mediterranean (formerly the Hellenistic kingdoms).
 
Top