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!
Conservatives can believe what they want, but I don't think any of the books were dictated by any God. The details which are common among the four Gospels are the most reliable, especially the ones with witnesses. Predictions or dreams about the future are the most unreliable.
That's not what the evidence is now showing, but that's another discussion for another day.
I agree. All the wisdoms of the ancients and the mulling of modern learned men require careful and mindful discernment.
Doesn't everyone still pay this price for sin? Why was additionally that killing needed?
Evidence??? Did you not know that the region that Abraham was called to was Canaan? Thats where the Canaanites lived.
Physical death in this temporal world is just a physical picture or reminder of a far worse spiritual death. Death in the scriptures refers to eternal separation from God, the Source of life, love, beauty, joy, and all goodness.
It's about being able to support your position with facts and reason, not some weak inuendo.
Your error, in my view, is a common Christian one, to think that the Tanakh refers at any point to Jesus.
Your error is assuming that the Tanak refers to him as a messiah. He is referred to as the righteous servant.
No, with respect, each of the five versions of Jesus in the NT expressly denies that he's God and never claims to be God. The Trinity notion is a solution to a political problem that arose in the early church in the second century CE, how to make the central character of Christianity God. Various versions were proposed but were unsuccessful ─ that God was a partnership of two or three entities, that God was corporation with two or with three directors, and so on.
Not according to eg
That argument doesn't account for God sitting on [his] hands and doing nothing while a child drowns in a pool, or innocent people are killed in an accident.
Nothing in the Tanakh foretells Jesus. Nothing distinguishes him as a Jewish messiah ─ he was never a civil, military or religious leader of the Jewish nation nor anointed by the Jewish priesthood.
Ignoring the facts about the righteous servant only serves to show that your position is religious, not rational.
Ignoring the ordinary procedures of historians only serves to show that your position is religious, not rational.
.... and we can't stop sinning. Sin=Death. We can't resurrect oneself or another.
I find false clergy often are political tools especially during war times.
Why do you think I'm doing that, and how would it affect your denial of the facts about the righteous servant?
You don't know what you're talking about. The connection between Balaam's vision of the star and sceptre and Michael Molnar's astrological solution for the Star of Bethlehem is beyond coincidence.
The concept of the Deity of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit was already well established and understood by the early churches before the 4th century. It only became politicized when the doctrine was challenged and the Roman Church had become aligned with government.
probe.org
The scriptures you posted are in reference to temporal conditions on this fallen planet.”, as well as specific situations. They do not show or prove that individuals do not have the freedom to respond to God in one way or another. God is not sitting doing nothing. Jesus entered the world to live among us, go to the cross and rise In victory over death and sin to offer eternal life. This is a fallen, condemned world which will be destroyed. A new heaven and earth is coming free of sin and suffering for all who want and choose trust God and be there.
There are hints of it early in the 2nd century, just none in the gospels or Paul, where those express denials I mentioned can be found.
No, as I mentioned, the form it should take was much disputed beforehand.
No, that's just an attempt at retrofit. What the author of Matthew did was mention Father, Jesus and Ghost in one sentence. Nothing in Matthew suggests they only have one identity.
They're the words of the Tanakh. As I may have mentioned, in my view the Jewish religion has the Tanakh as its book, and if you want to know what it means theologically you should ask a Jewish authority.
What is God sitting in [his] chair doing, in fact? As I may have asked you, is [he] cheering for the Israelis and approving the grotesque toll of Gazan citizens? Does [he] prefer Russian or Ukrainian Orthodoxy? Why is there no sign of divine will in either of those places (not to mention the rest of the world)?
I keep on asking what dying on the cross has to do with it, but I never seem to get a clear answer. An omnipotent God making a human sacrifice to [him]self is found in both the Tanakh and the NT, but I simply fail to understand why.
By what means will that new world by any more free of human vices, moral or genetic, than the present one is?
Paul was Jewish, a Pharisee who knew and believed in the Tanakh and ONE God, yet he came to know and worship Jesus Christ.
www.oneforisrael.org
I’m not getting off on the wars taking place in this world or what side God is on or not. No doubt God is simply letting humans sin play out, the consequences are evident everywhere.