Political Opinion

Then why does he want me killed? Romans 1 says I should be killed, and 2 Chronicles 15:12-13 says all non-believers should be killed, and finally Deuteronomy 13:13-19 says the entire town should be put to death if there is even one non-believer.

He really loves me…

He did it to save you from yourself, because He did make us with a free choice and free will, to choose and experience the consequence\reward of our choices. God is love. God is good. No bad can be in His presence.

So how did satan come about? Why did he encourage satan to kill Job’s family?

Simple. I am by birth a bad person.

Why? Surely at birth you can’t have done anything bad, you must choose to be bad, or good, only at a time you are old enough to make your own rational choices.

Finally, I would not choose to live anywhere on Earth than where I am now, Texas, in the US of A. I want America to keep with it’s founding principles of liberty, freedom, and reliance on Providence. Anyone who doesn’t want this can move elsewhere. Anyone who wants it should be allowed to move here and join in allegiance, lawfully. If you like Australia, I am very happy for you. Be where you are happy most.

Texas seems to be a Mecca for those with beliefs like yourself. Seeing as there are so many there commanded to kill me I shall be staying well away. For if they stay my execution Jeremiah 48:10 says they will be cursed.

Cyco single verses or passages are meaningless without understanding the context or the situation as a whole. Master tang if the bible has been altered by man how do you explain the Dead Sea scrolls? the word god is meaningless without a definition. Scientists cannot re create the events that led to our evolution. They can’t even create a living organism. The only way to create something that is alive is by reproduction. When/if we are able to create life in my opinion we will be gods. In a sense I’m god to my child.

I suspect paw3000 is looking at these men as people to respect the teachings of, as they have stood the test of time, so far.

How can there be no such thing as an athiest?

On a side note in Mark Forsyth’s book The Horologicon states that a thiest is not a theological word, but one describing someone who drinks tea (or cha).

Many of the great apes recognise theft and murder as bad and punish those who commit them. So, yes, they appear to consider it to be murder. Doesn’t really matter if you or I do or not.

Would it be easy for another species of primate to consider the same things to be bad without and guidance? One would have to think so. So does this mean god has told them this or they have just worked out that to have a functioning society that some things are considered bad for the group as a whole despite that they may have some benefit it the individual?

There are more reasons than that. Like the lack of proof that either a god, or Jesus, ever existed - but ignoring those why did such an amazingly perfect being create something perfect (Adam or satan, or both) that then surprised him by turning bad, and then he sent his son (which is himself) down to be killed to rescue everyone, but they haven’t actually be saved until they believe in a thing that is internally contradictory and can’t be proved to exist?

If you look at what God expects of us humans in the Bible, it does make sense, it’s not like He’s commandeering us around like robots, making us do things that are terrible.

Of course he doesn’t want people to do terrible things like conduct a census and because of that census (which he encouraged in 2 Samuel 24 along with 1 Chronicles 2) he kills 70,000 in 1 Chronicles 21:9-14. Nice guy…

There are people (very few) who live lives that have moral values, without really believing in God, and experience a feeling of fulfillment just because it’s like math, it always works. But there’s this problem when people die, they cannot save themselves from what happens next, Someone else must change that, only if they allow Him.

By your definition they cannot be fulfilled, so it is a circular argument. Many believe they will only turn to dust when they die, and that it is possible to delay, but not change that. Eating lots of fast foods, and others that are high in preservatives delays the purification of the body and exhumations show a far slower decay rate on those who eat more foods like this than those who eat ‘better’, more natural, foods.

My point was just to mention that Benjamin Franklin, a man of great intellect, reasoned that society of his day benefited from the teachings of Jesus Christ, despite his own doubts on Christ’s “divinity”. The complete quote I found was:

[I]“As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the System of Morals and his Religion, as he left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupt changes, and I have, with most of the present Dissenters in England, some Doubts as to his divinity; tho’ it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and I think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an Opportunity of knowing the Truth with less Trouble…” (Carl Van Doren. Benjamin Franklin. New York: The Viking Press, 1938, p. 777.)[/I]

Note the last sentence, where Franklin jokingly refers to his own impending death, which turned out to be a month after this was penned. And he was also well aware how the teachings had been hijacked by powerful interests over the centuries to become a source of great troubles for many. So, I find it all the more fascinating that Franklin made a motion at the Constitutional convention that they should bring in a clergyman to pray for their deliberations:

[I]“In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when present to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings?.. I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth - that God governs in the affairs of men.” (Catherine Drinker Bowen. Miracle at Phaladelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention, May to September 1787. New York: Book-of-the-Month Club, 1966, pp. 125-126)[/I]

Too bad Franklin never had the time to write down some of those “convincing proofs”. Would have been an interesting read.

p.s. like the way these guys used to talk…sounds so eloquent!

You are correct. Any passage by itself is hard to interpret, but if it is truly the word of god then they should all be taken as ‘gospel’ truth. In that case we have repeated occasions that one is to murder non-believers and take they cattle and virgin daughters. So that is how christians are told to behave by their god. Either that, or the whole thing has been modified by man and it is worthless as both a historical document and a guide to life. It has to be one or the other. It can’t be both, and you can’t pick and choose the bits you like and don’t like - otherwise you are playing god…

Scientists cannot re create the events that led to our evolution. They can’t even create a living organism. The only way to create something that is alive is by reproduction. When/if we are able to create life in my opinion we will be gods. In a sense I’m god to my child.

Define living.

Is a computer virus a living thing? It is autonomous, reproductive and totally out of the control of even its creator once it has been released.

Christians can’t reproduce any miraculous events, nor any proof of what they believe in. Science has shown evolution in action, give it time and I’m sure DNA (or the like) based life will be created in a lab somewhere.

Alright, alright. Break it up.

To change the subject…

The US senate had 3 minutes to pass a 150 page fiscal cliff bill… It was rammed through the house and President Obama was glad to sign off of it.

It was loaded with useless bs and pork.

Why am I not surprised?

The wbc are just a family of lawyers. I wouldn’t really call it a bastardization. They’re just horrible people looking to benefit from others misery.

Are you saying that each verse can be taken out of context because god said it? That seems ridiculous. You can’t just pick random parts of what somebody says.

What if he’s telling a story?

Yep, $76B worth of assorted corporate tax credits. Payback no doubt for various campaign contributions. Here’s the dirty details:

Tim Carney: How corporate tax credits got in the ‘cliff’ deal | WashingtonExaminer.com

The dead sea scrolls are ignored by most theologians.

Do they exist? Yes. Who or what were they written for?

Don’t know. Do they prove the existence of Jesus? No.

The hate they stand for is based on their interpretation of scripture. They have cherry picked passages to back up their skewed beliefs.

They bastardized it.

And yes, they are lawyers. They sue over everything.

So was the recent FEMA bill. a few billion down the drain on stuff that had nothing to do with Sandy.

Now, isn’t Timmy “Tax Dodge” Geihtner supposed to be doing “extraordinary things” to avoid the debt ceiling right now?

Where do they find the money?

Bastards… All of them.

Master Tang…

Show me concrete proof of the existence of Jesus

Okay first off what is the date today? Hmmm it seems the calender is entirely based on Jesus.

You say don’t quote the bible and discount the dead sea scrolls. Well this post would be about as thick as a bible if I were to try and show you every bit of evidence so I will stick to some basic stuff.

I’m not trying to convert you or anyone just a little food for thought…

The book of Daniel was written 556 bc It is a book that is well known for it’s prophecy. I will expand upon just one (as it relates to the dead sea scrolls)

In the book of Daniel the author prophesies about Alexander the Great and his rule. He also prophesies about ATJ leaving his wife for another and his wife killing her. Also prophesies about his general eventually taking over as ruler.

I won’t bother going into a deep theological discussion other than to say that there is solid evidence that this is exactly what was prophesied and there are certain “rules” that back this up. If you want to look into it I encourage you to do that so you can understand more clearly.

These prophesies were so exact and so perfect that most historians thought it was a fraud. After all how can so many details be exact about a man’s rule in 356 bc and who would eventually die in 323 bc?

The historians believed that The Book of Daniel had to be written after Alexander the Great. There was no other explanation.

–than–

on the west bank in palestine in 1947 (ish) the dead sea scrolls were discovered and since it has been proven that in fact The Book of Daniel was written before Alexander the Great thus proving it a true prophecy.

On that note there are in fact 2500 prophecies in the bible in which 2000 have been fulfilled.
Just the prophecies about Jesus alone number about 300. Some of these were written thousands of years before Jesus was born.

side note If you doubt Jesus was born I can prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. The real question should be was Jesus God? (or God’s son depending who you ask) but again I am trying to keep this post smaller than War and Peace so…

Okay so lets talk probabilities. A study conducted at MIT talking about Jesus just fulfilling 8 prophecies. I’m talking about things He could not have any possible control over (earthly control) for example where He was born, when He was born, manner of Death: People’s reactions, piercing of side, burial Resurrection ets.

The odds of just 8 prophecies being fulfilled are 1 in 100 trillion!
Think about that number for a second…

Somebody in an earlier post referenced Texas so here you go :wink:

1 in 100 trillion odds are like

If I were to take 100 trillion silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas, they would be two feet deep. Now if I marked one of these silver dollars and thoroughly stir the whole mass–all over the state. Now blindfold a man and let him travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick only one silver dollar.

What would the chances of him picking the marked silver dollar? That is the same odds of Jesus fulfilling only 8 prophecies by coincidence!

If you look at this evidence with wisdom you have no choice but to conclude that
A. The bible is supernatural in nature
B. Jesus fulfilling those prophecies was no coincidence

As for the question did Jesus really exist. The answer is a resounding Yes! In fact even His enemies proved his existence. There is strong and undeniable proof.

As for is Jesus really God if you really want me to post my answer I will be happy to but grab a coffee and relax because it is going to be a long long post.

Thanks,
John

BTW I truly hope I haven’t offended anyone

Is there any historical proof that Jesus existed?

The ancient historical record provides examples of writers, philosophers and historians who lived during or not long after the time Jesus is believed to have lived and who testify to the fact that he was a real person. We will look at what some of these people have said.
Cornelius Tacitus

Tacitus lived from A.D. 55 to A.D. 120. He was a Roman historian and has been described as the greatest historian of Rome, noted for his integrity and moral uprightness. His most famous works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals relate the historical narrative from Augustus’ death in A.D.14 to Nero’s death in A.D. 68. The Histories begin their narrative after Nero’s death and finish with Domitian’s death in A.D. 96. In his section describing Nero’s decision to blame the fire of Rome on the Christians, Tacitus affirms that the founder of Christianity, a man he calls Chrestus (a common misspelling of Christ, which was Jesus’ surname), was executed by Pilate, the procurator of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Tacitus was hostile to Christianity because in the same paragraph he describes Christus’ or Christ’s death, he describes Christianity as a pernicious superstition. It would have therefore been in his interests to declare that Jesus had never existed, but he did not, and perhaps he did not because he could not without betraying the historical record.
Lucian of Samosata

Lucian was a Greek satirist of the latter half of the second century. He therefore lived within two hundred years of Jesus. Lucian was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it. He particularly objected to the fact that Christians worshipped a man. He does not mention Jesus’ name, but the reference to the man Christians worship is a reference to Jesus.
Suetonius

Suetonius was a Roman historian and a court official in Emperor Hadrian’s government. In his Life of Claudius he refers to Claudius expelling Jews from Rome on account of their activities on behalf of a man Suetonius calls Chrestus [another misspelling of Christus or Christ].
Pliny the Younger

Pliny was the Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (AD. 112). He was responsible for executing Christians for not worshipping or bowing down to a statue of the emperor Trajan. In a letter to the emperor Trajan, he describes how the people on trial for being Christians would describe how they sang songs to Christ because he was a god.
Thallus and Phlegon

Both were ancient historians and both confirmed the fact that the land went dark when Jesus was crucified. This parallels what the Bible said happened when Jesus died.
Mara Bar-Serapion

Some time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion, who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King. Claiming to be a king was one of the charges the religious authorities used to scare Pontius Pilate into agreeing to execute Jesus.
Josephus

Josephus was a Jewish historian who was born in either 37 or 38 AD and died some time after 100 AD. He wrote the Jewish Antiquites and in one famous passage described Jesus as a wise man, a doer of wonderful works and calls him the Christ. He also affirmed that Jesus was executed by Pilate and actually rose from the dead!
The four Gospels

The four Gospels are the four accounts of Jesus’ life, which are contained in the New Testament part of the Bible. Historians will tell you that the closer an historical document is written to the time of the events it describes, the generally more reliable it is as a source of information about those events. Matthew’s Gospel account of Jesus’ life is now reckoned to have been written sometime between AD 70 and AD 80. Mark’s Gospel is dated between AD. 50 and AD. 65. Luke’s Gospel is dated in the early AD 60s and John’s Gospel sometime between AD 80 and 100. If Jesus died sometime in the AD 30s, it is clear that Mark, Luke and Matthew wrote their Gospels within living memory of Jesus’ death. John’s Gospel comes later and probably outside of living memory for most as John lived to an unusually old age for the ancient period, but the accuracy of his Gospel was verified no doubt by those who read the earlier Gospels.

Another feature of the Gospels is that they were written by men who either knew Jesus personally, or who knew people who themselves knew Jesus personally. Matthew was a former tax collector who became a disciple of Jesus. Mark was a close associate of Simon Peter, who is regarded as being Jesus’ most prominent disciple whilst Jesus was on the earth. Luke was a close associate of Paul who is the most famous of Christian missionaries and who wrote the largest contribution to the New Testament. Paul, in turn, was a close colleague of Simon Peter. John was the former fisherman who became the closest disciple of Jesus. The accounts of such men need to be considered at least seriously!

Perhaps the most famous argument that Jesus is in fact God…

Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?

Even those who are not persuaded by Christianity often have great respect for Jesus. Among those who reject the idea that Jesus was God incarnate, there are many who are nevertheless followers of him to some degree. “Jesus was a great moral teacher”, some say, “but he wasn’t God”. According to this view, Jesus is to be followed as a great human being, but not as a divine one.

This idea that Jesus was merely a great human being, i.e. a great human being but nothing more, is, as C.S. Lewis argued in Part 2 of Mere Christianity, indefensible.

Jesus made the most astonishing claims, not only about God, society and ethics, but also about himself. He claimed to have the authority to forgive sins, to be the representative of all humanity come to die in order to reconcile man to God, and to be the only way for people to attain salvation.

Faced with the fact that Jesus made these claims about himself, there are three things that we might say about him: Either Jesus’ claims were false and he knew it, or his claims were false and he didn’t know it, or his claims were true. None of these suggests that Jesus was a great, but merely human, teacher. Anyone who has that view needs to think again.

The first thing that we might say about Jesus is that his claims were false and he knew it, in which case he was a liar. If Jesus did not believe that his claims about himself were true, then when he made those claims he was lying.

Jesus’ claims about himself were so central to his teachings, though, that if they were lies then he can hardly be deemed a great teacher. If Jesus set out to systematically deceive people about who he was and how their sins were to be dealt with, then he was among the worst teachers that have ever walked the earth.

The second thing that we might say about Jesus is that his claims were false and he didn’t know it, in which case he was a lunatic. If Jesus believed that his claims about himself were true, and they weren’t, then he was a delusional egomaniac. If an ordinary person believes himself to be God incarnate, then that person is, put quite simply, insane.

Again, if this were the case, if Jesus taught that this is who he was and was mistaken, then he was as bad a teacher as there has ever been.

The third thing that we might say about Jesus is that his claims were true, in which case he was, and is, Lord. If Jesus believed that his claims about himself were true and they were, then Jesus was not only a great human being, but was also God on Earth.

If we take Jesus seriously, then we must take Jesus’ claims about himself seriously. We cannot say that Jesus was a great teacher whom we admire and look up to, but that the most fundamental element of his teachings was a monumental error. Jesus was not a great, but merely human, teacher; he was either much less than this, or much more.

Those who respond to this argument by writing Jesus off as either a liar or a lunatic are, for all that has been said so far, just as reasonable as those who respond by accepting Jesus as Lord. This argument is an attack only on the view that Jesus was a great teacher but not God; there is nothing in it that counts against the view that Jesus was a terrible teacher. In order to show that it is better to view Jesus as Lord than as either a liar or a lunatic, it would have to be demonstrated that there is some reason to take Jesus’ claims seriously.

Do we have any reason, though, to take Jesus’ claims seriously? Many have argued that we do, that we have the strongest possible evidence that Jesus knew what he was talking about when it came to the supernatural. There is, it is argued, substantial historical evidence that Jesus was raised from the dead, endorsing his claims to religious authority.

The Resurrection, it is said, was a divine endorsement of Jesus’ teachings, God’s confirmation that Jesus’ teachings were true. If this is correct, then there can be no doubt as to which of the three positions concerning Jesus outlined above is the correct one. If there is significant evidence for the resurrection, then we have to take Jesus seriously.

today (tomorrow in my timezone) is the day people used to celebrate the fact that days start to be longer, 15 days after the Winter Solstice. The 6 january and 25 december were celebrated by the Roman empire, egyptians and greeks, centuries before Christ.
The calendar you know (365 days and 52 weeks), was also implemented the year 46 bc… so its a big mistake to think the calendar is based on Jesus, because it was created before him; is exactly the other way, christianism celebrations are based on astronomic events and other cultures celebration days.

so this point is completely against your theory. :wink:

Thank you Johnnykanoo. What I meant about the Dead Sea scrolls was. The bible was written and passed down until 1947 then the scrolls were found. You would think a 1,500 year old document would have alterations. When they verified the bible against the scrolls it was highly accurate (95%). So I think the argument of the bible being altered or that it lacks integrity should be dismissed. As far as I’m aware theologians AND historians use the bible as a historical reference for those periods. The second point is how amazing and even maybe divinely inspired it is that a document is that accurate after 1,500 years.

I had forgotten where I heard that argument about Jesus being either the son of god or a lunatic. Mere Christianity should be required reading. CS Lewis is an awesome author and atheist turned Christian.

It’s always funny how atheists are the first to quote the Bible and often consider themselves experts on it, yet they completely misunderstand Christianity. Christianity is not the Bible. The Bible is only the word of God. How can you possibly expect to understand the word of God if you have no relationship with Him? No wonder you read it so out of context, you read it with a mindset of “let’s prove this thing wrong wherever possible”. I have been a Christian for almost 2 decades and yet I don’t throw scriptures around the way atheists like to.

God being “surprised by Adam’s sin” - I almost fell out of my chair at that one! LOL

I think someone should always approach foreign ideas and concepts with empathy. You don’t have to agree but at least understand. I don’t agree with socialism but I understand it. I understand how it’s a good idea and that for the most part people who want it want fairness and equality no discourse. But it doesn’t work because the leaders abuse their power. The same thing happens with capitalism. I also understand human nature. I understand that we are lazy. I understand that the only time we put forth effort is if the reward for the effort is worth it to us.