Also, I don't believe that just because someone in this world hasn't encountered someone who calls themselves Christian, or audibly heard the name Jesus Christ, it is not still possible for the Holy Spirit to reach them, as as said, among other places in the Bible, in Luke ch. 19 v.10:
“I tell you,” [Jesus] replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”
I do believe that deathbed conversion can occur,but I think it's more than a cursory claim of "I'm sorry". I think genuine conversion is a product of a lifetime of change concerning the subject.
That is between that person and God, but there is evidence that you can accept Christ on your deathbed and be saved.
Matthew 20:1-16
“For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire workers for his vineyard. He agreed to pay them a denarius for the day and sent them into his vineyard.
“About nine in the morning he went out and saw others standing in the marketplace doing nothing. He told them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.’ So they went.
“He went out again about noon and about three in the afternoon and did the same thing. About five in the afternoon he went out and found still others standing around. He asked them, ‘Why have you been standing here all day long doing nothing?’
“‘Because no one has hired us,’ they answered.
“He said to them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard.’
“When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the workers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first.’
“The workers who were hired about five in the afternoon came and each received a denarius. So when those came who were hired first, they expected to receive more. But each one of them also received a denarius. When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner. ‘These who were hired last worked only one hour,’ they said, ‘and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day.’
“But he answered one of them, ‘I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius? Take your pay and go. I want to give the one who was hired last the same as I gave you. Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’
“So the last will be first, and the first will be last.”
That is between that person and God, but there is evidence that you can accept Christ on your deathbed and be saved.
Matthew 20:1-16
I do too I just didn't agree with the previous wording of it. I don't think it's a matter of spouting the words, so much as it is a matter of the heart.
I do too I just didn't agree with the previous wording of it. I don't think it's a matter of spouting the words, so much as it is a matter of the heart.
True.
EDIT: Also, you don't need to be baptized to be saved, as the thief on the cross next to Jesus was also saved and yet he was not baptized.
Luke 23:39-43
One of the criminals who were hanged [on a cross] railed at him, saying, "Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!" But the other rebuked him, saying, "Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." And he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." And he said to him, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."
I don't think this is going anywhere lock-worthy yet (which is amazing, considering how fast religion threads usually go bad), but you guys do have me a little worried. Also...
I'd say I'm in-between Atheist and Agnostic. I don't completely discount the possibility of god, I just think it is incredibly unlikely; and if there is a god it certainly isn't a Christian one (or any other major religion for that matter).
I don't think this is going anywhere lock-worthy yet (which is amazing, considering how fast religion threads usually go bad), but you guys do have me a little worried. Also...
I used to be religious. But then my family underwent a series of crises. First my dad died (eleven years ago today, in fact 11 years and 42 minutes at the time of writing), with no previous symptoms or anything. Then a few months later, my nan died. Then, a month or so after that, my auntie. And then a few months later, my gran. After that, I thought what was the point? If god is all powerful, then why did he decide to make our family go through these hardships? We'd never hurt anyone before. The religious folk amongst you would argue that it's gods way of testing our faith (I used a similair arguement in my Religion exam a few years back. I got an A* overall in it), but If a god needs to kill people and completely ruin peoples lives just to make sure they praise him, I don't want anything to do with him. We still feel the effects of those times. I can't help but think how much better my life would have been had I grown up with a father.
Firstly, condolences for all of your losses. I can't imagine what it would be like to have that many blows in such a short space of time, so I can't really blame you at all for falling away from your faith.
But I just wanted to say that if one believes in God and is a Christian, then one needs to take into account that there is more than just a light force in this world. If you're going to believe in God/the Trinity and angels, then you have to also believe in Satan and demonic forces; you can't discount or ignore this side of the belief system. See, this is what many people seem to forget when discussing this topic: there are conflicting/opposing spiritual forces (if one believes such thing (I do - call me crazy if you like)). As a result, there's undoubtedly going to be evil in this world; there's undoubtedly going to be horrible things that are going to happen to undeserving people, and while God could perhaps be blamed for not stepping in or preventing such things, I just have to point out that He's not actually making these things happen; these aren't His works.
Plus, despite the fact god is omnipotent and omnipresent, there are still very bad deeds committed all over the world. I was taught at Sunday school that God was responsible for all the actions we do, shaping our decisions, and effectively controlling us. If that is the case, then why do people commit bad acts? Why are there hundreds of different faiths? Why did he need to send down his son to forgive us of our sins, if it was he who made us commit them?
No, sorry, what you were taught at Sunday is entirely wrong. God believes in free will; he gave us that, and that's something he doesn't tamper with. God does not control us at all; at times he may try to guide or lead us in the right direction, but never does he control us as puppets.
And, ultimately, if you believe what is told in the Bible, then free will is also what allowed man's downfall; it gave way to man accepting a world in which evil exists (once again, I'm talking from a standpoint where we're just assuming this is all true). Likewise, free will is also what causes people to commit bad acts, it is why people have been led astray, it is why humanity is constantly bickering, fighting and killing one another - these things have been spawned from, a) free will, and b) the presence of evil in this world (which also came as a result of man having free will).
Aha. I frakking love how well this thread represents the scattered and wildly different views of the folks that make up The Church. Anybody reading this should, accurately, get the idea that we don't know much beyond that God and Jesus exist and love us and help us. I also love how this has miraculously mostly stayed civil and been a good discussion of various beliefs instead of devolving into "Atheist r dumb" "No Christian r dumb" thread. Yay community!
Well. I don't want to get too theological (again). But if you're taught in the Calvinist school, then man has little free will. If you're taught from the Arminian school, then man is attributed a greater amount of free will. Calvinism was a reaction to Catholicism, which was felt (at the time) to take authority out of God's hands and put it into the church hierarchy. So Calvinist's conception came with attributing a ton of authority to God's hands, including removing much of what we would deem free will. In the hardest form of Calvinism, not even when you're saved can you actually know if you're saved, since it was predetermined. Arminianism was, in turn, a reaction to Calvinism, and was a minority opinion for a long time, but has recently found strong footing especially over the 20th century. Arminianism attributes greater free will to man.
Aha. I frakking love how well this thread represents the scattered and wildly different views of the folks that make up The Church. Anybody reading this should, accurately, get the idea that we don't know much beyond that God and Jesus exist and love us and help us. I also love how this has miraculously mostly stayed civil and been a good discussion of various beliefs instead of devolving into "Atheist r dumb" "No Christian r dumb" thread. Yay community!
I have so much I want to say.....but what's the point? Forums are a breeding ground for arguments on these subjects. Not debate. Nothing changes in the end. In fact, I have no interest in even a healthy debate. It doesn't lead to anywhere any more than a heated hateful argument. At best it's merely an exchange of intellectual conversation. But what's the point in just sharing ideas for mere comparison? That's not what I believe religion or spirituality of any kind is for.
I'm a Christian. If anybody is curious about it and wants to learn more about it, I'm happy to share and help you along with it. But I don't want to argue or even debate on the subject. It does nothing but prove either how insightful and smart you are or how pig-headed you are. There is a place for conversations like these I think, but open forums are not one of them. Private messages maybe. Emails. Phone or face-to-face conversations helping somebody along in a belief they already have or want to have. Nobody's ever going to prove to anybody else that they're wrong and that they should believe what another person believes. That's not how humanity works. We're stubborn and stuck up and everything we believe is right because we believe it. There must be something wrong with the other person. Personally, I believe this is the very opposite of everything Christianity and spirituality stands for. Give it to those that want it. Those that don't, let them be. (I'm not giving out orders here, I'm just stating my viewpoint on the matter)
Maybe some of you here truly enjoy having a healthy debate and sharing intellectual conversation about these things, and if so awesome. Maybe some enjoy heated arguments, if so I don't envy you. But just know it isn't necessarily going to go anywhere other than having that intellectual conversation. Personally, I don't see casual intellectual conversational debate as worthy of such a topic as spirituality. It's a bit of a waste.
Huh. I just realized the irony of this entire post.
Musically Inspired,it's ok to be ironic some times. Seeing things multiple different ways is only socially constructed to be a bad thing. You're thinking...you have the imagination to see both sides. Don't let any one put you down about this, you're mind has the potential to grow and reach out with this dreaded irony, or confusion, whatever others have created in place to hinder you.
That is a language problem, it's got nothing to do with right/ wrong values. All you need to do is simply reword it and it's no longer ironic and it's now seeing things in two or more different ways, having a imagination. Be careful, wary of others who try to hinder your growth, even if they don't intend to.
One thing I do wonder about, is why the Christians who believe in hell do not seem all that bothered about the thought of me going there. Occasionally, they will try to convert me to Christianity, but surely if you truly believed I was going to suffer for eternity, you would do much much more to save me?
I mean, if I knew that there was a bomb on a plane, I would do all I freaking could to make sure nobody got on that plane. Even if it meant coming across as a bit of a git for half an hour.
And yet, eternal suffering, which is much worse than just a bomb, doesn't seem to get much reaction at all.
I'd love to hear from Christians why this is.
There are a number of things to talk about when answering this question.
First, all Christians are called to help lead people to Christ. Christians know this as The Great Commission, and is given to us by Jesus in Matthew 28:16-20:
Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
I figure that for some people (in America at least) to not be so outoing and persistent- or "in-your-face"- about their faith says more about our culture in general than about Christ. It seems to me that perhaps Americans at least are not actively persecuted and ridiculed for their faith, so to some degree they are wary or afraid of being treated so, even though Jesus specifically says in the Bible to rejoice when you are persecuted for Him. I have met people from other countries who are actively persecuted- even killed- for their faith, and they are very on fire for God and outgoing about their faith especially in the midst of such adversity.
Also, the "body of Christ" (ie. followers of Christ) does have different parts just as a physical body does, and these different parts are better at performing different functions. People are each given different spiritual gifts and are therefore better at serving Christ in different ways, such as those who are more evangelical or outgoing than others.
[edit:]
Also, I don't believe that just because someone in this world hasn't encountered someone who calls themselves Christian, or audibly heard the name Jesus Christ, it is not still possible for the Holy Spirit to reach them, as as said, among other places in the Bible, in Luke ch. 19 v.10:
“I tell you,” [Jesus] replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”
[/edit]
Finally, and most importantly, I believe that though my continued efforts to reach people for Christ is indeed important, what really matters is that you listen and heed the Holy Spirit as it calls to you. As Jesus says in Mark 4:26-29:
He also said, “This is what the kingdom of God is like. A man scatters seed on the ground. Night and day, whether he sleeps or gets up, the seed sprouts and grows, though he does not know how. All by itself the soil produces grain—first the stalk, then the head, then the full kernel in the head. As soon as the grain is ripe, he puts the sickle to it, because the harvest has come.”
So you see, though it is important to witness to others, or to "sow the seed of the Gospel," your salvation is not based entirely on whether or not I personally hound you all the time to make sure that you become saved. It is the Holy Spirit of God that encourages the seed to grow; thus it is less important that I continually bother you but more so that you listen as the Spirit calls to you, and that you be receptive to and follow Him as He leads you to accept Christ's sacrifice for us.
Happy zombie Jesus day, everyone! PROTIP: With as many traditions as the holiday stole from Paganism, I'd go so far as to say anyone of any creed can celebrate it. Let's go get drunk!
It doesn't make much sense for people to say that Jesus is not the Messiah.
Jesus himself claimed to be the Son of God several times throughout His life, even when He was a small child:
Luke 2:41-50
Every year Jesus’ parents went to Jerusalem for the Festival of the Passover. When he was twelve years old, they went up to the festival, according to the custom. After the festival was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends. When they did not find him, they went back to Jerusalem to look for him. After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.” “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?” But they did not understand what he was saying to them.
Later in life, during His ministry:
John 14:6-7 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”
Matthew 16:13-17
When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”
“But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”
Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.
Also, Jesus' coming was prophesied several times in the Old Testament. Isaiah predicted His coming several times and did so several hundred years beforehand:
Isaiah 59:15b-16,20
The LORD looked and was displeased that there was no justice. He saw that there was no one, he was appalled that there was no one to intervene; so his own arm achieved salvation for him, and his own righteousness sustained him.
“The Redeemer will come to Zion, to those in Jacob who repent of their sins,” declares the LORD.
Concerning His resurrection- when Jesus was arrested His disciples fled. After He died and was buried, His disciples hid away in a house and kept the door locked for fear of being caught. But after Christ was raised from the dead, they went around and proclaimed Him to all that they met, and even died still saying that He had risen. If He had not- if it was a hoax or a lie, someone would have broken and admitted it was so, but they didn't. All but one of the eleven original apostles was killed for their faith in Him (John was exiled, not killed) and they never wavered from it.
It doesn't make much sense for people to say that Jesus is not the Messiah.
Jesus himself claimed to be the son of God several times throughout His life, even when he was a small child...
You do realize he could have had schizophrenia or something, right? I was on the MARTA train in Atlanta once who claimed to be Jesus. He was really convinced of it, too. What makes your guy the son of "god" that this guy doesn't have?
After all, the only evidence we have that Jesus even existed is the apocryphal writings of a bunch of guys who weren't even there from hundreds of years later. The Romans - who were anal retentive about keeping records - didn't even leave any mention of the guy. Your Jesus is likely a character cobbled together from the beliefs of separatist Hebrew cultists by the emperor Constantine in order to legitimize himself using religious conversion and cement his hold on power.
If you're going to believe something, try something that holds up to logic better.
You do realize he could have had schizophrenia or something, right? I was on the MARTA train in Atlanta once who claimed to be Jesus. He was really convinced of it, too. What makes your guy the son of "god" that this guy doesn't have?
After all, the only evidence we have that Jesus even existed is the apocryphal writings of a bunch of guys who weren't even there from hundreds of years later. The Romans - who were anal retentive about keeping records - didn't even leave any mention of the guy. Your Jesus is likely a character cobbled together from the beliefs of separatist Hebrew cultists by the emperor Constantine in order to legitimize himself using religious conversion and cement his hold on power.
If you're going to believe something, try something that holds up to logic better.
This is inaccurate from several historic points. At the time of Constantine, Christianity was a religion of the elite (urban dwellers versus rural inhabitants) and he would have likely have received exposure to it from relatives. Christianity was concentrated in urrban centers in the Roman world due to the level of people that could be reached. However it would have maintained an underground status especially after varying crackdowns that preceded Constantine. Textual documents of the Gospel, both Orthodox and Gnostic, were already in circulation. There are a varying amount of these in the historical record, plus the external historical documentation of martyrs and crackdowns. Portions of later canonicized materials predate Constatine.
Mind you this is not an argument for the validity of Jesus' claim to be the Messiah, but rather a historical look at the materials concerning Jesus that predate Constantine.
Books of interest concerning the evolution of the empire during this time period may include Chris Wickham's "The Inheritance of Rome", Paul Veyne's "When Our World Became Christian", Ramsey McMullen's "Christianizing the Roman Empire", Stephen Williams' "Diocletian and the Roman Recovery", Ramsay McMullen's "Paganism in the Roman Empire", E.R. Dodds' "Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety", and Charles Freeman's "A.D. 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State".
This is inaccurate from several historic points. At the time of Constantine, Christianity was a religion of the elite (urban dwellers versus rural inhabitants) and he would have likely have received exposure to it from relatives. Christianity was concentrated in urrban centers in the Roman world due to the level of people that could be reached. However it would have maintained an underground status especially after varying crackdowns that preceded Constantine. Textual documents of the Gospel, both Orthodox and Gnostic, were already in circulation. There are a varying amount of these in the historical record, plus the external historical documentation of martyrs and crackdowns. Portions of later canonicized materials predate Constatine.
Mind you this is not an argument for the validity of Jesus' claim to be the Messiah, but rather a historical look at the materials concerning Jesus that predate Constantine.
Ah. Fair enough. I stand by my claim that the belief in Jesus as messiah has no factual backing, though.
Ah. Fair enough. I stand by my claim that the belief in Jesus as messiah has no factual backing, though.
To play both sides of the argument and stick to my historical background, it is common in historical circles to argue for the insertion of particular verses that may have supported a "Jesus as Messiah" argument, including lines such as "I Am". There are Gnostic references to Jesus never having made such a claim. What this ultimately leads to is a questioning of how authoritative were those who compiled the Gospel at varying councils, and whether they had a stake in the issue. Supporters of this school of thought, that Jesus' claims to being Messiah were inserted by other authors, usually subscribe to the Jesus School of theological assessment that became popular especially in the 90s, though CNN just covered its founder about a month ago.
Chyron, what are your sources for the claim that the apostles were killed for their faith in Christ's resurrection?
I've heard the claim before but never seen any evidence at all. The only deaths covered in the bible are Judas (doesn't really count) and James (he was killed but we're not told why)
I also don't understand why the passages you've given show Jesus was the Messiah. The prophecy argument would be compelling if it were something statistically unlikely, but that prophecy seems to just be saying there will be a messiah, not that it would definitely be Jesus.
Thanks to response for my question by the way! Very thoughtful and interesting
Virgin birth
Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
Son of God
Isaiah 9:6-7
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this.
Performing miracles
Isaiah 35:4-6
say to those with fearful hearts, "Be strong, do not fear; your God will come, he will come with vengeance; with divine retribution he will come to save you." Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped. Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue shout for joy. Water will gush forth in the wilderness and streams in the desert.
Preceded by a messenger (ie. John the Baptist)
Isaiah 40:1-5,9
Comfort, comfort my people, says your God. Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and proclaim to her that her hard service has been completed, that her sin has been paid for, that she has received from the LORD's hand double for all her sins. A voice of one calling: "In the desert prepare the way for the LORD; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God. Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain. And the glory of the LORD will be revealed, and all mankind together will see it. For the mouth of the LORD has spoken." ... say to the towns of Judah, "Here is your God!"
Spat on and beaten
Isaiah 50:6
I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting.
Rejected
Isaiah 53:1-3
Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Died for our sins
Isaiah 53:4-6
Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
He would be silent when accused
Isaiah 53:7
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.
Death on a cross and buried in a wealthy man's tomb yet without sin
Isaiah 53:9
He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.
Killed with other criminals
Isaiah 53:12
Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
He asked a question about Isaiah, I answered it. I'm not ranting.
There's no need to be bitter.
edit: I'm just talking about my faith. People are interested in hearing my point of view and I'm not trying to start a flame war, so I don't see where the problem is.
Where does your animosity toward Christians and the Bible come from? I'm not offended or anything, it just seems that you're rather angry about the whole issue.
Yeah... Um... The bible proves nothing. The veracity of that text is itself in question. You can't prove anything by ranting bible verses at us.
It's all about belief, obviously you don't believe but you don't have to poo-poo those that do and are talking and sharing about what they believe my man.
It'd be much akin to me going into the D&D thread and telling everyone the game's crap because I don't play it. Well no, it's nothing like that, but you get what i'm trying to say
It's all about belief, obviously you don't believe but you don't have to poo-poo those that do and are talking and sharing about what they believe my man.
It'd be much akin to me going into the D&D thread and telling everyone the game's crap because I don't play it. Well no, it's nothing like that, but you get what i'm trying to say
I suppose so, good sir. I suppose so. Time to unsub this thread. You know what they say, after all - if you can't say anything nice and all that. It's a subject on which I've only the most unkind of opinions. Consider me withdrawn from the discussion.
As a former non believer I certainly don't think that Comrade Pants saying "The Bible Proves Nothing" is poo pooing on believers. He's asking a very critical question that long time believer should probably ask themselves: Why should we take the Scriptures as reliable? Do they prove anything? Dood asks another critical question: Is Christ's Messiah claim outstanding from a statistical perspective? Or is he merely one more that can fit the criteria?
These are both questions that will never have 100% satisfying answers. best that can be done is provide weight of evidence and let individuals decide. That said, I'm not going to dove into those from my iPad at work
It should also be noted that in my second period of non belief, Scripture id not suffice to me as evidence, either.
I would find it pretty impressive if the old testament correctly predicted a load of stuff that later happened, but Isaiah disappointingly never says it's a prediction for the messiah. That out the way, I'm more interested in the sources for the disciples being killed for their refusal to give up faith?
Also surely scripture can be taken for something? In books like the gospel of luke, it's pretty clear he's trying to do history.
I would find it pretty impressive if the old testament correctly predicted a load of stuff that later happened, but Isaiah disappointingly never says it's a prediction for the messiah. That out the way, I'm more interested in the sources for the disciples being killed for their refusal to give up faith?
Also surely scripture can be taken for something? In books like the gospel of luke, it's pretty clear he's trying to do history.
Luke is a latter Gospel possibly assembled from interviews and earlier documents, most likely framed around an earlier document, typically attributed to be the Gospel of Mark. Some postulate the theoretical Q Document but we have no practical evidence such a thing exists.
Documentation of the disciples being killed comes from within the New Testament, from the church fathers such as Origen, and various church records and traditions.
Old Testament prophecy was translated in a very different method from the method used today, is difficult to explain and takes much longer to cover. I can do that when I'm not working.
"Documentation of the disciples being killed comes from within the New Testament, from the church fathers such as Origen, and various church records and traditions."
I agree with Pants in that using the Bible to try and convince non-believers is a poor strategy. That only goes for trying to convince people, though.
For instance, if I may quote you, Chyron, when you talk about Jesus saying he was the son of God as a child, someone who doesn't believe will read it as "The Bible says that Jesus said he was the son of God as a kid". Due to how the Bible was written by humans (and humans can be wrong or lie) was translated countless times (and things get lost in translation), was put together from many works that were selected and censored, etc, it's not going to convince a non-believer any more than, centuries from now, someone saying "Harry Potter must have been real because the other characters in the book treat him like a real person" would be convincing.
This only goes for trying to use it as an argument. And it doesn't make me angry, I just want to try and explain why it's unlikely to ever work, when the alleged proof comes from the thing that is asked to be proven in the first place.
As far as talking with other people who also believe in it, of course that works fine I assume. It's only weird to see it used as arguments. I always just look at it and wonder if it was meant to make me change my mind or something.
It's not really my purpose to argue about it. If you're receptive, then you are. If you're not, then I'm not sure what purpose there is in arguing.
Perhaps I did get a little ahead of myself in, while voicing what I believe, sounding like I'm trying to convert everyone.
This comes back to my response to when dood was asking why Christians don't try to "beat the hell out of him" so to speak, that they don't constantly badger him about being saved. In the end, all I can do is plant a seed and pray that it grows. It's the Holy Spirit calling and one's willingness to respond that makes the seed grow, it's not my doing.
I suppose I'm feeling more that I understand exactly what MusicallyInspired was saying.
Dude-mans / dude-ladies, one of the best ways to witness to Jesus The Messiah and Generally Awesomesauce Dude that I don't sort of have a mancrush on is to love one another and treat each other with The Lord's grace and respect.
I saw some hig school girl wearing a phrase shirt the other day. The shirt said "We lead by example whether or not we mean to."
THAT'S how we witness. We lead by example, and if that example is good then we draw people toward spirituality and maybe eventually theology. And then it's up to them to make their own decision, counsel as we may. We all have to learn things for ourselves. Religion included.
@Chyron, I think a lot of arguments start like this. That is, two people with different beliefs are trying to explain what they believe and how they believe it, and things like that, and the other person thinks they're trying to "convert" them, or change their mind, and feel like they're being aggressive or offensive or something.
And then of course it can become a real fight if the people react defensively.
One thing I've notice with trying to explain some of my unusual beliefs, or practices (not religious ones, just ways in which I'm different from most people), is that a lot of people will assume I'm judging them, telling them I'm right and they're wrong, or trying to convert them, when all I'm doing is explaining how I personally work. So I can see how the same would happen in discussions like this one.
I'd love to hear perspectives on the (now rather cliched) matter of suffering. The most common one I hear is that free will is necessary for actions to be considered meaningful, but also permits evil. I found that an adequate answer until recently, when I thought this doesn't really fit with my idea of heaven. Surely in heaven there is free will, but also there is no suffering.
I'm aware that heaven is a whole different ball game, but why couldn't our current existence have been created in a similar fashion, such that someone is free to do what they want, but that there is no suffering?
Also, I agree with what avistew said, and not just cos I'm a sucker for avistew. I hope I'm not coming across as argumentative. I am genuinely interested in other's mindsets, and am trying to question as respectfully as I can
Comments
Religion is what it is...whatever...
Carry on like ya all have for centuries...can't even see what's under yer noses...
Wait, got to do laundry.
That is between that person and God, but there is evidence that you can accept Christ on your deathbed and be saved.
Matthew 20:1-16
I do too I just didn't agree with the previous wording of it. I don't think it's a matter of spouting the words, so much as it is a matter of the heart.
True.
EDIT: Also, you don't need to be baptized to be saved, as the thief on the cross next to Jesus was also saved and yet he was not baptized.
Luke 23:39-43
Per se. I'm sorry, I had to.
Glad to be corrected.
Firstly, condolences for all of your losses. I can't imagine what it would be like to have that many blows in such a short space of time, so I can't really blame you at all for falling away from your faith.
But I just wanted to say that if one believes in God and is a Christian, then one needs to take into account that there is more than just a light force in this world. If you're going to believe in God/the Trinity and angels, then you have to also believe in Satan and demonic forces; you can't discount or ignore this side of the belief system. See, this is what many people seem to forget when discussing this topic: there are conflicting/opposing spiritual forces (if one believes such thing (I do - call me crazy if you like)). As a result, there's undoubtedly going to be evil in this world; there's undoubtedly going to be horrible things that are going to happen to undeserving people, and while God could perhaps be blamed for not stepping in or preventing such things, I just have to point out that He's not actually making these things happen; these aren't His works.
No, sorry, what you were taught at Sunday is entirely wrong. God believes in free will; he gave us that, and that's something he doesn't tamper with. God does not control us at all; at times he may try to guide or lead us in the right direction, but never does he control us as puppets.
And, ultimately, if you believe what is told in the Bible, then free will is also what allowed man's downfall; it gave way to man accepting a world in which evil exists (once again, I'm talking from a standpoint where we're just assuming this is all true). Likewise, free will is also what causes people to commit bad acts, it is why people have been led astray, it is why humanity is constantly bickering, fighting and killing one another - these things have been spawned from, a) free will, and b) the presence of evil in this world (which also came as a result of man having free will).
We accept you as one of us.
A BSG fan? We accept you, brother!
I'm a Christian. If anybody is curious about it and wants to learn more about it, I'm happy to share and help you along with it. But I don't want to argue or even debate on the subject. It does nothing but prove either how insightful and smart you are or how pig-headed you are. There is a place for conversations like these I think, but open forums are not one of them. Private messages maybe. Emails. Phone or face-to-face conversations helping somebody along in a belief they already have or want to have. Nobody's ever going to prove to anybody else that they're wrong and that they should believe what another person believes. That's not how humanity works. We're stubborn and stuck up and everything we believe is right because we believe it. There must be something wrong with the other person. Personally, I believe this is the very opposite of everything Christianity and spirituality stands for. Give it to those that want it. Those that don't, let them be. (I'm not giving out orders here, I'm just stating my viewpoint on the matter)
Maybe some of you here truly enjoy having a healthy debate and sharing intellectual conversation about these things, and if so awesome. Maybe some enjoy heated arguments, if so I don't envy you. But just know it isn't necessarily going to go anywhere other than having that intellectual conversation. Personally, I don't see casual intellectual conversational debate as worthy of such a topic as spirituality. It's a bit of a waste.
Huh. I just realized the irony of this entire post.
That is a language problem, it's got nothing to do with right/ wrong values. All you need to do is simply reword it and it's no longer ironic and it's now seeing things in two or more different ways, having a imagination. Be careful, wary of others who try to hinder your growth, even if they don't intend to.
I guess this is not about religion.
There are a number of things to talk about when answering this question.
First, all Christians are called to help lead people to Christ. Christians know this as The Great Commission, and is given to us by Jesus in Matthew 28:16-20: I figure that for some people (in America at least) to not be so outoing and persistent- or "in-your-face"- about their faith says more about our culture in general than about Christ. It seems to me that perhaps Americans at least are not actively persecuted and ridiculed for their faith, so to some degree they are wary or afraid of being treated so, even though Jesus specifically says in the Bible to rejoice when you are persecuted for Him. I have met people from other countries who are actively persecuted- even killed- for their faith, and they are very on fire for God and outgoing about their faith especially in the midst of such adversity.
Also, the "body of Christ" (ie. followers of Christ) does have different parts just as a physical body does, and these different parts are better at performing different functions. People are each given different spiritual gifts and are therefore better at serving Christ in different ways, such as those who are more evangelical or outgoing than others.
[edit:] [/edit]
Finally, and most importantly, I believe that though my continued efforts to reach people for Christ is indeed important, what really matters is that you listen and heed the Holy Spirit as it calls to you. As Jesus says in Mark 4:26-29: So you see, though it is important to witness to others, or to "sow the seed of the Gospel," your salvation is not based entirely on whether or not I personally hound you all the time to make sure that you become saved. It is the Holy Spirit of God that encourages the seed to grow; thus it is less important that I continually bother you but more so that you listen as the Spirit calls to you, and that you be receptive to and follow Him as He leads you to accept Christ's sacrifice for us.
Jesus himself claimed to be the Son of God several times throughout His life, even when He was a small child:
Later in life, during His ministry: Also, Jesus' coming was prophesied several times in the Old Testament. Isaiah predicted His coming several times and did so several hundred years beforehand:
Concerning His resurrection- when Jesus was arrested His disciples fled. After He died and was buried, His disciples hid away in a house and kept the door locked for fear of being caught. But after Christ was raised from the dead, they went around and proclaimed Him to all that they met, and even died still saying that He had risen. If He had not- if it was a hoax or a lie, someone would have broken and admitted it was so, but they didn't. All but one of the eleven original apostles was killed for their faith in Him (John was exiled, not killed) and they never wavered from it.
After all, the only evidence we have that Jesus even existed is the apocryphal writings of a bunch of guys who weren't even there from hundreds of years later. The Romans - who were anal retentive about keeping records - didn't even leave any mention of the guy. Your Jesus is likely a character cobbled together from the beliefs of separatist Hebrew cultists by the emperor Constantine in order to legitimize himself using religious conversion and cement his hold on power.
If you're going to believe something, try something that holds up to logic better.
This is inaccurate from several historic points. At the time of Constantine, Christianity was a religion of the elite (urban dwellers versus rural inhabitants) and he would have likely have received exposure to it from relatives. Christianity was concentrated in urrban centers in the Roman world due to the level of people that could be reached. However it would have maintained an underground status especially after varying crackdowns that preceded Constantine. Textual documents of the Gospel, both Orthodox and Gnostic, were already in circulation. There are a varying amount of these in the historical record, plus the external historical documentation of martyrs and crackdowns. Portions of later canonicized materials predate Constatine.
Mind you this is not an argument for the validity of Jesus' claim to be the Messiah, but rather a historical look at the materials concerning Jesus that predate Constantine.
Books of interest concerning the evolution of the empire during this time period may include Chris Wickham's "The Inheritance of Rome", Paul Veyne's "When Our World Became Christian", Ramsey McMullen's "Christianizing the Roman Empire", Stephen Williams' "Diocletian and the Roman Recovery", Ramsay McMullen's "Paganism in the Roman Empire", E.R. Dodds' "Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety", and Charles Freeman's "A.D. 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State".
Ah. Fair enough. I stand by my claim that the belief in Jesus as messiah has no factual backing, though.
To play both sides of the argument and stick to my historical background, it is common in historical circles to argue for the insertion of particular verses that may have supported a "Jesus as Messiah" argument, including lines such as "I Am". There are Gnostic references to Jesus never having made such a claim. What this ultimately leads to is a questioning of how authoritative were those who compiled the Gospel at varying councils, and whether they had a stake in the issue. Supporters of this school of thought, that Jesus' claims to being Messiah were inserted by other authors, usually subscribe to the Jesus School of theological assessment that became popular especially in the 90s, though CNN just covered its founder about a month ago.
I've heard the claim before but never seen any evidence at all. The only deaths covered in the bible are Judas (doesn't really count) and James (he was killed but we're not told why)
I also don't understand why the passages you've given show Jesus was the Messiah. The prophecy argument would be compelling if it were something statistically unlikely, but that prophecy seems to just be saying there will be a messiah, not that it would definitely be Jesus.
Thanks to response for my question by the way! Very thoughtful and interesting
Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
Son of God
Isaiah 9:6-7
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this.
Performing miracles
Isaiah 35:4-6
say to those with fearful hearts, "Be strong, do not fear; your God will come, he will come with vengeance; with divine retribution he will come to save you." Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped. Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue shout for joy. Water will gush forth in the wilderness and streams in the desert.
Preceded by a messenger (ie. John the Baptist)
Isaiah 40:1-5,9
Comfort, comfort my people, says your God. Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and proclaim to her that her hard service has been completed, that her sin has been paid for, that she has received from the LORD's hand double for all her sins. A voice of one calling: "In the desert prepare the way for the LORD; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God. Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain. And the glory of the LORD will be revealed, and all mankind together will see it. For the mouth of the LORD has spoken." ... say to the towns of Judah, "Here is your God!"
Spat on and beaten
Isaiah 50:6
I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting.
Rejected
Isaiah 53:1-3
Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Died for our sins
Isaiah 53:4-6
Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
He would be silent when accused
Isaiah 53:7
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.
Death on a cross and buried in a wealthy man's tomb yet without sin
Isaiah 53:9
He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.
Killed with other criminals
Isaiah 53:12
Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
There's no need to be bitter.
edit: I'm just talking about my faith. People are interested in hearing my point of view and I'm not trying to start a flame war, so I don't see where the problem is.
Where does your animosity toward Christians and the Bible come from? I'm not offended or anything, it just seems that you're rather angry about the whole issue.
It's all about belief, obviously you don't believe but you don't have to poo-poo those that do and are talking and sharing about what they believe my man.
It'd be much akin to me going into the D&D thread and telling everyone the game's crap because I don't play it. Well no, it's nothing like that, but you get what i'm trying to say
I suppose so, good sir. I suppose so. Time to unsub this thread. You know what they say, after all - if you can't say anything nice and all that. It's a subject on which I've only the most unkind of opinions. Consider me withdrawn from the discussion.
These are both questions that will never have 100% satisfying answers. best that can be done is provide weight of evidence and let individuals decide. That said, I'm not going to dove into those from my iPad at work
It should also be noted that in my second period of non belief, Scripture id not suffice to me as evidence, either.
Also surely scripture can be taken for something? In books like the gospel of luke, it's pretty clear he's trying to do history.
Luke is a latter Gospel possibly assembled from interviews and earlier documents, most likely framed around an earlier document, typically attributed to be the Gospel of Mark. Some postulate the theoretical Q Document but we have no practical evidence such a thing exists.
Documentation of the disciples being killed comes from within the New Testament, from the church fathers such as Origen, and various church records and traditions.
Old Testament prophecy was translated in a very different method from the method used today, is difficult to explain and takes much longer to cover. I can do that when I'm not working.
This bit. Go into detail on this bit :P
For instance, if I may quote you, Chyron, when you talk about Jesus saying he was the son of God as a child, someone who doesn't believe will read it as "The Bible says that Jesus said he was the son of God as a kid". Due to how the Bible was written by humans (and humans can be wrong or lie) was translated countless times (and things get lost in translation), was put together from many works that were selected and censored, etc, it's not going to convince a non-believer any more than, centuries from now, someone saying "Harry Potter must have been real because the other characters in the book treat him like a real person" would be convincing.
This only goes for trying to use it as an argument. And it doesn't make me angry, I just want to try and explain why it's unlikely to ever work, when the alleged proof comes from the thing that is asked to be proven in the first place.
As far as talking with other people who also believe in it, of course that works fine I assume. It's only weird to see it used as arguments. I always just look at it and wonder if it was meant to make me change my mind or something.
Perhaps I did get a little ahead of myself in, while voicing what I believe, sounding like I'm trying to convert everyone.
This comes back to my response to when dood was asking why Christians don't try to "beat the hell out of him" so to speak, that they don't constantly badger him about being saved. In the end, all I can do is plant a seed and pray that it grows. It's the Holy Spirit calling and one's willingness to respond that makes the seed grow, it's not my doing.
I suppose I'm feeling more that I understand exactly what MusicallyInspired was saying.
I saw some hig school girl wearing a phrase shirt the other day. The shirt said "We lead by example whether or not we mean to."
THAT'S how we witness. We lead by example, and if that example is good then we draw people toward spirituality and maybe eventually theology. And then it's up to them to make their own decision, counsel as we may. We all have to learn things for ourselves. Religion included.
And then of course it can become a real fight if the people react defensively.
One thing I've notice with trying to explain some of my unusual beliefs, or practices (not religious ones, just ways in which I'm different from most people), is that a lot of people will assume I'm judging them, telling them I'm right and they're wrong, or trying to convert them, when all I'm doing is explaining how I personally work. So I can see how the same would happen in discussions like this one.
I'm aware that heaven is a whole different ball game, but why couldn't our current existence have been created in a similar fashion, such that someone is free to do what they want, but that there is no suffering?
Also, I agree with what avistew said, and not just cos I'm a sucker for avistew. I hope I'm not coming across as argumentative. I am genuinely interested in other's mindsets, and am trying to question as respectfully as I can