Why do you accept Jesus as Messiah?

[Wildswanderer]

Neither have you. In Christianity, Jesus is alive.

Now he is.
After suffering one of the most horrific physical deaths possible for a human to endure.
Plus having the weight of every sin of every human ever put on him.

 

[ppp]

Understand. Academically speaking, I really studied it and am satisfied that it is true (although you may not come to the same conclusion)... like two people looking at the same earth's beginnings and coming up with two different hypothesis.

Do I have a hypothesis on this matter? I look at the text that is the purported prophecy, and I look at the historical and archaeological records and do not see alignment between the two. Is that a hypothesis? I shouldn't think so.

 

[ppp]

Now he is.
After suffering one of the most horrific physical deaths possible for a human to endure.

I agree that it would have been torture. But not death in any meaningful sense. At most he was unconscious for about 36 hours.

Plus having the weight of every sin of every human ever put on him.

If the story is to be believed, which is unlikely, then they were God's sins in the first place. Everything that supposedly happened in the garden was God's fault. And even if they were not, forgiveness does not require rituals of blood. God could simply have forgiven.

 

[Wildswanderer]

I agree that it would have been torture. But not death in any meaningful sense. At most he was unconscious for about 36 hours.


If the story is to be believed, which is unlikely, then they were God's sins in the first place. Everything that supposedly happened in the garden was God's fault. And even if they were not, forgiveness does not require rituals of blood. God could simply have forgiven.

How were they God's sins? That doesn't even make sense.
And unconscious is far different from dead...he went to Hades while he was dead.

 

[ppp]

How were they God's sins? That doesn't even make sense.

If you toss a weapon into a playpen full of kids, is the resulting blood and pain the faults of the toddlers? Or is it yours. I say that it is yours.

And unconscious is far different from dead...he went to Hades while he was dead.

If you are having experiences then you are not dead.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
The myth makes no sense, if they already knew it was wrong to eat the fruit, why would the fruit from the "tree of knowledge" matter? If it was verboten then why put

Because no choice equals no free will. No free will equals no ability to choose obedience.

Not relevant to what I said. Also you didn't address why a deity with omniscience put it deliberately in harms way, then acted as if its human pets that had no knowledge of right and wrong, were entirely culpable for eating it. As I said it's nonsensical.

They were no doubt like children in their understanding but I've found kids know when they do wrong. Even my dog knows that.

They only know this because they are taught to know it, obviously.

 

[Sheldon]

Plus having the weight of every sin of every human ever put on him.

Not me, whatever mistakes I have made in my life are mine, no one else's. I find the idea of someone else being tortured to death for something others have done utterly repugnant, though of course I don't believe any of it,

If a deity wanted to a blood sacrifice to appease its anger, that would be its choice, and nothing to do with me.

 

[Triumph]

Not me, whatever mistakes I have made in my life are mine, no one else's. I find the idea of someone else being tortured to death for something others have done utterly repugnant, though of course I don't believe any of it,

If a deity wanted to a blood sacrifice to appease its anger, that would be its choice, and nothing to do with me.

People that believe in a blood sacrifice to a God are not followers of Jesus. Jesus told people they are responsible for their own sins and must ask God for forgiveness of them in the ritual of water baptism, so no life is killed as a blood sacrifice. Jesus supports the God granted right to life. Jesus also supported the God given right to freedom of speech as Jesus was condemned to die for blasphemy for opposing a religion that believed in killing people that did not agree with them.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Not me, whatever mistakes I have made in my life are mine, no one else's. I find the idea of someone else being tortured to death for something others have done utterly repugnant, though of course I don't believe any of it,

If a deity wanted to a blood sacrifice to appease its anger, that would be its choice, and nothing to do with me.

You still have the option of coming to God through Jesus because of his sacrifice on your behalf
Doesn't matter what your current opinion is

 

[Wildswanderer]

If you toss a weapon into a playpen full of kids, is the resulting blood and pain the faults of the toddlers? Or is it yours. I say that it is yours.

If you are having experiences then you are not dead.

That's just your false understanding of death.
God didn't toss a weapon, he offered paradise in exchange for simple obedience in relationship to him.

 

[ppp]

That's just your false understanding of death.

As the post to which you are responding is not about death, but culpability for one's own actions, you are either terribly confused, or changing the subject again. If I had to bet, I would bet on the latter.

 

[Triumph]

You still have the option of coming to God through Jesus because of his sacrifice on your behalf
Doesn't matter what your current opinion is

Only Pharisee Paul that grafts people into the Jewish religion, the tree that bears no fruit, claims it is the death of Jesus that removes sin.
Jesus never taught that.
Blood= Wine= NEW religion= doctrine of words of God that commands believe in water baptism for removal of sin.
It is the words that save if believed and we are to drink those words, take them into our beliefs.
Jesus explained his Flesh is the exact same thing.
Flesh=Bread=Doctrine= NEW religion=WORDS that save.
People are to become those words as we eat and drink them making them the merciful basis of our life rejecting
the satanic ritual of human sacrifice to a God.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Only Pharisee Paul that grafts people into the Jewish religion, the tree that bears no fruit, claims it is the death of Jesus that removes sin.
Jesus never taught that.
Blood= Wine= NEW religion= doctrine of words of God that commands believe in water baptism for removal of sin.
It is the words that save if believed and we are to drink those words, take them into our beliefs.
Jesus explained his Flesh is the exact same thing.
Flesh=Bread=Doctrine= NEW religion=WORDS that save.
People are to become those words as we eat and drink them making them the merciful basis of our life rejecting
the satanic ritual of human sacrifice to a God.

You aren't making sense. Jesus sacrificed himself just as he said he would.

Water is just water....if water saved me I would have been saved the first time my mom bathed me.

 

[Wildswanderer]

As the post to which you are responding is not about death, but culpability for one's own actions, you are either terribly confused, or changing the subject again. If I had to bet, I would bet on the latter.

Um, you are the one that brought up the false assumption that the dead can not do anything in the Spirit realm.

 

[Triumph]

You aren't making sense. Jesus sacrificed himself just as he said he would.

Water is just water....if water saved me I would have been saved the first time my mom bathed me.

You must confess your sins to God asking forgiveness when water baptized. Everyone is responsible for their own sins.
Infant baptism is meaningless as mature decision to be baptized is required of each individual before confessing their sins asking God for forgiveness.

The Romans disapproved of the Jews demand for Jesus to be killed because their secular court of law proved he was innocent of any crime worthy of death. Pilot washed his hand as a symbol whatever happens to Jesus is not approved by the Roman governor. Rome wants to spare the life of Jesus.
If the Romans set Jesus free the Jews still were going to kill him and his followers. They wanted Rome to do the killing to make it appear that the Jews were innocent of any wrongdoing and Jews had won the court case against Jesus.
They force Rome into the position of support the Jewish religion or if not, the result is war. Both Rome and Jesus knew it was going to be the death of one-man or perhaps thousands in a bloody conflict over religion.
The doctrine of Jesus refuses to support religious blood sacrifices but he did support love of all people and wanted none to die in battle.

Jesus laid down his life to stop a religious war so no one on either side would fight and die.
His death removed no one's sin. The Jews saw themselves as innocent, so no Jew accepted Jesus as a sacrifice to remove their sins.
The true followers were already whole, having had their sins removed with water baptism needing no sacrifice.
Jews viewed Jesus as a criminal that was destroying their religion that needed to be killed.

Only the liar Pharisee Paul claimed that the death of Jesus was desired by God as a sacrifice for sin removal. Paul saw Jesus as a criminal that needed to die, and Paul perceived that Paul was innocent in demanding the murder. Paul also wants people to agree that Paul was sinless for the crime of murder.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Jesus laid down his life to stop a religious war so no one on either side would fight and die.
His death removed no one's sin. The Jews saw themselves as innocent, so no Jew accepted Jesus as a sacrifice to remove their sins.
The true followers were already whole, having had their sins removed with water baptism needing no sacrifice.
Jews viewed Jesus as a criminal that was destroying their religion that needed to be killed.

Well that's new. Weird but new.
Jesus died to stop a religious war? That's nowhere in scripture.
"this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death."

Why did he die again? Because God sent him to do just that.

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies,


So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken.

He didn't die to stop any war.
His sacrificial death was prophesied in the Old Testament.



Surely he has borne our griefs

and carried our sorrows;

yet we esteemed him stricken,

smitten by God, and afflicted.

But he was pierced for our transgressions;

he was crushed for our iniquities;

upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,

and with his wounds we are healed.
Isaiah 53

 

[ppp]

As the post to which you are responding is not about death, but culpability for one's own actions, you are either terribly confused, or changing the subject again. If I had to bet, I would bet on the latter.

As the post to which you are responding is not about death, but culpability for one's own actions, you are either terribly confused, or changing the subject again. If I had to bet, I would bet on the latter.

Um, you are the one that brought up the false assumption that the dead can not do anything in the Spirit realm.

Even if I had done so, that would still be irrelevant to the post you are responding to. You are just changing the subject away from another one of those gaping holes yawning chasms in your religious claims.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Even if I had done so, that would still be irrelevant to the post you are responding to. You are just changing the subject away from another one of those gaping holes yawning chasms in your religious claims.

I have no idea what you are going on about.
Jesus died. He didn't go unconscious for three days.

 

[ppp]

I have no idea what you are going on about.

Its not my fault that your beliefs are not robust enough to withstand a little scrutiny.

 

[Kenny]

Do I have a hypothesis on this matter? I look at the text that is the purported prophecy, and I look at the historical and archaeological records and do not see alignment between the two. Is that a hypothesis? I shouldn't think so.

Like I said, we have two and three people looking at the same information, data and history and coming to two different conclusion.

I have no problem that you have a different conclusion.