Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,916,433 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by arleigh
God not only speaks with in me but provides affirmation by other means as well ,prepared ahead of me and for my attention, in publications or other people sharing ,that know nothing of the issues in my own life .
Did you ever see the movie "Bruce almighty" Near the beginning he is wanting God to answer him, and God does, using signs of all sorts, but Bruce is ignoring all of them, till he finally crashes into a poll.
The prophets of old had to learn to listen and receive instruction from what ever means God chooses for them.
Balham the prophet was failing in his relationship to turn to God and listen ,and riding his donkey in a very narrow place ,God put an angel in the way the donkey could see but Balham could not, and he started beating the donkey and got thrown off, and God used the donkey to speak to him and reprimand him .
God has spoken to me through men that are not godly at all ,affirming something important I needed to know ,but these people have no what they said to me, or that I was listening .
You like to call this coincidence , and for the unbeliever that's all they have to work with , but as a child of God, He affirms His word/instruction in may ways to those listening /choose to listen.
What is the most omnipresent element we have on this planet? oxygen .
Some places it is denser some thinner but it is virtually every where, and you cannot live with out it.
God is Spirit , and unlike any thing else created God is every where at once only with out measure .
He is aware of you, and all your secrets, and lies, and aware of the good you do as well, but rebellion you believe insulates you from debt.
But it does not.
Jesus came and displayed a manifestation of God, man could receive, and the provision to restore the relationship in those that actually and earnestly and humbly wanted fellowship with God .
Jesus demonstrated obedience to the Father in all His ways, and going to the cross was the supreme demonstration of obedience and love for the Father.
Remember that this was a demonstration of God ,Jesus the physical representation for man to see.
(In Jesus was the fullness of the Godhead bodily)
Jesus provided the Holy Spirit ,the Spirit that filled Him, in this link with the Father .
Jesus said if I do not go, the Holy Spirit cannot come. Jesus (God's physical display to man had to be out of the scene, and the Holy Spirit which was in Him, was free to abide with and teach all those that believe .
And this He does today in those that have repented of their self govern and desperately requested God's govern.
And this I do every day, because I know His guidance and trust Him, and know His govern is far and away better then mine or any one else's .
Believers cooperate with God, we do not manipulate Him.
There are times God puts names on my heart I do not know ,and I look to God for how to pray for them and what other need I have business with if any .
I go where God inspires me to go, and do to the best of my instruction that needs done .
I do this because I love God , and He knows who needs His intervention.
All who know God's instruction obey Him like this.
But to do that on my own, with out His instruction, though it might be noble, may actually do more harm then good.
Many men do noble things, but not being instructed of God to do them, is self govern, not God's govern =rebellion.
Many Christians are not taught to seek after knowing God's voice in them, and their teachers are insisting they be their link to knowing God's will via their interpretation of scriptures even claiming to be taught of the Spirit of God to do so .
Jesus did not teach this .
It is God's intention to be our teacher.
Jeramiah 31;31,32,32,34, John 6; all 1John 2;20-
God may have spoken to you, but he forgot to tell you about using sentence breaks, or paragraphs.
It makes things a lot easier to read. Think about it.
That's 2,000 years ago. There is no physical evidence. There is written evidence with regards to the Bible, but you choose not to believe.
We are not called to supply evidence and proof. Christianity is based on faith.
The misuse of Paul's writings is just a stumbling block - as it is used improperly out of its context.
RESPONSE:
Have you ever read the works of Aristotle and Plato which are far older than 2000 years? How about the Epic of Gilgemesh (3000 years old?)of which there are still two extant copies.
In the case of written works the original of which have not survived, we have copies, don't we? As is the case with the Pauline Epistles?
And regarding what Jesus "said" did Jesus have a secretary who wrote down what he said down.. Or were these saying attributed to him 40-70 years after his death. And did you ever notice he's quoted differently in the different gospels?
I accept the Bible for what it has proven to be, the writings of different men telling somewhat different stories.
Excerpted from A Concise History of the Catholic Church
By Father Thomas Bokenkotter, SS
Their authors9of the gospels) did not deliberately invent or falsify facts about Jesus, but they were not primarily concerned with historical accuracy. They readily included material drawn from the Christian communities' experience of the risen Jesus. Words, for instance, were put in the mouth of Jesus and stories were told about him which, though not historical in the strict sense, nevertheless, in the minds of the evangelists, fittingly expressed the real meaning and intent of Jesus as faith had come to perceive him. For this reason, scholars have come to make a distinction between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith."
All of the world's religions are based of faith, but all on different faiths. How did you pick yours?
Since these are all different, I look for the evidence or facts. We are "called upon" to use common sense not blind belief!
And you aren't going to try that old "out of context ploy" when you don't want to accept the plain meaning of words as in Paul's Corinthians, are you?
And since Paul mentions nothing about an empty tomb, here's a queston for you. Who added this detail, and when was it added? Was it by a witness?
Last edited by Aristotle's Child; 11-03-2015 at 11:04 AM..
Reason: typo
Now, do you have any evidence to present to support your opinion?
Or can we consider your reply in it's present form to be "an assertion without evidence"?
I too can cite a reference. The Pauline Epistles. "Test everything"..."Put away childish things."
Let's exercise our critical-thinking skills, A. Child. I didn't state an opinion at all. My post is perfectly consistent with someone who believes the Resurrection is hogwash. I don't happen to believe the Resurrection is hogwash, but I stated no opinion in my post. Rather, you have mindlessly trotted out what is apparently one of your standard responses to anyone who does express a religious opinion. The point of my post was to encourage people, on issues as important as the reality or non-reality of the Resurrection, to get their information from a more reliable and authoritative source than some anonymous nobody who calls himself A. Child (or Little Bo Pepys) on an Internet forum. There is actual scholarship in these areas. People of the intellectual capacity of Wright, Habermas, Licona and Lane (or thousands of others who could be cited) do not hold "childish beliefs." It is only fear and a lack of confidence in your own position that would cause you to characterize a belief in the Resurrection as "childish." A belief in the Resurrection may be wrong, of course, which is why I encourage those who are seriously interested to study the topic and form their own beliefs.
The text by N. T. Wright does an admirable job of marshaling what evidence there is for the Resurrection. The fact that a defeated group of disciples who had seen their leader suffer an ignominious fate that was complexly inconsistent with their previous understanding of the Messiah were IMMEDIATELY transformed into aggressive proselytizers who, across the board, cheerfully paid the penalty of gruesome deaths for their beliefs is, if not direct evidence, highly suggestive. The fact that the faith survived the crucifixion and rapidly flourished is likewise highly suggestive.
Let's exercise our critical-thinking skills, A. Child. I didn't state an opinion at all. My post is perfectly consistent with someone who believes the Resurrection is hogwash. I don't happen to believe the Resurrection is hogwash, but I stated no opinion in my post. Rather, you have mindlessly trotted out what is apparently one of your standard responses to anyone who does express a religious opinion. The point of my post was to encourage people, on issues as important as the reality or non-reality of the Resurrection, to get their information from a more reliable and authoritative source than some anonymous nobody who calls himself A. Child (or Little Bo Pepys) on an Internet forum. There is actual scholarship in these areas. People of the intellectual capacity of Wright, Habermas, Licona and Lane (or thousands of others who could be cited) do not hold "childish beliefs." It is only fear and a lack of confidence in your own position that would cause you to characterize a belief in the Resurrection as "childish." A belief in the Resurrection may be wrong, of course, which is why I encourage those who are seriously interested to study the topic and form their own beliefs.
The text by N. T. Wright does an admirable job of marshaling what evidence there is for the Resurrection. The fact that a defeated group of disciples who had seen their leader suffer an ignominious fate that was complexly inconsistent with their previous understanding of the Messiah were IMMEDIATELY transformed into aggressive proselytizers who, across the board, cheerfully paid the penalty of gruesome deaths for their beliefs is, if not direct evidence, highly suggestive. The fact that the faith survived the crucifixion and rapidly flourished is likewise highly suggestive.
RESONSE:
Really? Immediately???? I understood from Acts of the Apostles, that Jesus' immediate followers remained a observant sect within Judaism for 50 years while they awaited Jesus promised second coming. About 85 AD they were expelled from the Jewish synagogues as apostates (minim) after they began to claim that Jesus was divine as well as being the messiah.
There ya go - 2,000 years of Christian scholarship can be jettisoned because some anonymous Internet poster who calls herself "bluecheese" has spoken. Participation on Internet forums relating to religion almost appears to be some form of masturbation on the part of nonbelievers. It's really quite weird. The mindlessness and obvious anger destroy any possible effectiveness. Anyway, for those who prefer to actually think about issues, as opposed to basing their positions on Internet posts by anonymous clowns calling themselves Aristotle's Child, bluecheese or Little Bo Pepys, I would recommend N. T. Wright's massive study The Resurrection of the Son of God, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, and William Lane Craig's The Historical Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus and Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus. You may not be convinced by the work of these scholars, but at least you will be informed, less likely to say blatantly silly things on Internet forums, and better able to identify silly things when they are said.
Yeah its like a Christian going to Judaism forum and arguing daily that Jesus was the Messiah and their beliefs are blasphemy or a Islam forum and trying daily to convince them that Allah is not real and just a made up moon God idol, at that point would be banned for trolling.
Its actually quite creepy and displays some sort of inward insecurity to try and justify their unbelief.
History says enough people believed it happened in order to
permanently change the course of history very significantly.
From John the Baptist to the Seige of Jerusalem and the permanent
cleaving of Christianity away from Judaism, the whole 1st Century
is one of massive change and strifes. We do not have all the records.
Much was destroyed by all parties. Even the Christians burned books !
Have you ever read the works of Aristotle and Plato which are far older than 2000 years? How about the Epic of Gilgemesh (3000 years old?)of which there are still two extant copies.
In the case of written works the original of which have not survived, we have copies, don't we? As is the case with the Pauline Epistles?
And regarding what Jesus "said" did Jesus have a secretary who wrote down what he said down.. Or were these saying attributed to him 40-70 years after his death. And did you ever notice he's quoted differently in the different gospels?
I accept the Bible for what it has proven to be, the writings of different men telling somewhat different stories.
Excerpted from A Concise History of the Catholic Church
By Father Thomas Bokenkotter, SS
Their authors9of the gospels) did not deliberately invent or falsify facts about Jesus, but they were not primarily concerned with historical accuracy. They readily included material drawn from the Christian communities' experience of the risen Jesus. Words, for instance, were put in the mouth of Jesus and stories were told about him which, though not historical in the strict sense, nevertheless, in the minds of the evangelists, fittingly expressed the real meaning and intent of Jesus as faith had come to perceive him. For this reason, scholars have come to make a distinction between the Jesus of history and the Christ of faith."
All of the world's religions are based of faith, but all on different faiths. How did you pick yours?
Since these are all different, I look for the evidence or facts. We are "called upon" to use common sense not blind belief!
And you aren't going to try that old "out of context ploy" when you don't want to accept the plain meaning of words as in Paul's Corinthians, are you?
And since Paul mentions nothing about an empty tomb, here's a queston for you. Who added this detail, and when was it added? Was it by a witness?
I am fine with what the gospel writers have recorded. They are all alive when Christ died on the cross and had personal interactions with Him. There is also the matter of the Holy Spirit which proclaims truth to those in the family of God.
God revealed Himself to me 22 years ago. I chose to have faith in Him.
Blind faith... isn't all faith blind? ...since by definition, faith is about what we can't see?
Paul's context, testing, putting away childish things... it is not about testing the proof of the evidence provided in the gospels. Totally out of context.
>>I am fine with what the gospel writers have recorded. They are all alive when Christ died on the cross and had personal interactions with Him.<<
RESPONSE: I'm afraid that is very doubtful. First of all recognize that earliest gospel wasn't written until 70 AD or about 40 years after the death of Jesus. John's gospel wasn't written until at least 60 years after the death of Jesus.
……….Matthew: From the Introduction to Matthew from the New American Bible
“The ancient tradition that the author was the disciple and apostle of Jesus named Matthew (see Mt 10:3) is untenable because the gospel is based, in large part, on the Gospel according to Mark (almost all the verses of that gospel have been utilized in this), and it is hardly likely that a companion of Jesus would have followed so extensively an account that came from one who admittedly never had such an association rather than rely on his own memories.”
The Gospel we call Matthew was written anonymously. Papias, a second century bishop, named it Matthew’s Gospel sometime after 132 AD
……...Mark Mark was not an eyewitness to the events of Jesus' life. He was a disciple of Peter and undoubtedly it was Peter who informed Mark of the life of Christ and guided him in writing the Gospel known by his name. "Papias claimed that Mark, the Evangelist, who had never heard Christ, was the interpreter of Peter, and that he carefully gave an account of everything he remembered from the preaching of Peter."7 Generally, Mark is said to be the earliest Gospel with an authorship of between A.D. 55 to A.D. 70.
Critical analysis makes it difficult to accept the idea that the gospel as it now stands was written by one person. Jn 21 seems to have been added after the gospel was completed; it exhibits a Greek style somewhat different from that of the rest of the work. The prologue (Jn 1:1–18) apparently contains an independent hymn, subsequently adapted to serve as a preface to the gospel. Within the gospel itself there are also some inconsistencies, e.g., there are two endings of Jesus’ discourse in the upper room (Jn 14:31; 18:1). ….
“Other difficulties for any theory of eyewitness authorship of the gospel in its present form are presented by its highly developed theology and by certain elements of its literary style. For instance, some of the wondrous deeds of Jesus have been worked into highly effective dramatic scenes (Jn 9); there has been a careful attempt to have these followed by discourses that explain them (Jn 5; 6); and the sayings of Jesus have been woven into long discourses of a quasi-poetic forum resembling the speeches of personified Wisdom in the Old Testament.”
>>There is also the matter of the Holy Spirit which proclaims truth to those in the family of God.>>
RESPONSE: Do you have any evidence of this or is it just wishful thinking. If the Holy Spirit inspired the gosple writers how come there are so many contraditions and errors.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,916,433 times
Reputation: 4561
[quote=Aristotle's Child;41795073]
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
>>I am fine with what the gospel writers have recorded. They are all alive when Christ died on the cross and had personal interactions with Him.<<
RESPONSE: I'm afraid that is very doubtful. First of all recognize that earliest gospel wasn't written until 70 AD or about 40 years after the death of Jesus. John's gospel wasn't written until at least 60 years after the death of Jesus.
……….Matthew: From the Introduction to Matthew from the New American Bible
“The ancient tradition that the author was the disciple and apostle of Jesus named Matthew (see Mt 10:3) is untenable because the gospel is based, in large part, on the Gospel according to Mark (almost all the verses of that gospel have been utilized in this), and it is hardly likely that a companion of Jesus would have followed so extensively an account that came from one who admittedly never had such an association rather than rely on his own memories.”
The Gospel we call Matthew was written anonymously. Papias, a second century bishop, named it Matthew’s Gospel sometime after 132 AD
……...Mark Mark was not an eyewitness to the events of Jesus' life. He was a disciple of Peter and undoubtedly it was Peter who informed Mark of the life of Christ and guided him in writing the Gospel known by his name. "Papias claimed that Mark, the Evangelist, who had never heard Christ, was the interpreter of Peter, and that he carefully gave an account of everything he remembered from the preaching of Peter."7 Generally, Mark is said to be the earliest Gospel with an authorship of between A.D. 55 to A.D. 70.
Critical analysis makes it difficult to accept the idea that the gospel as it now stands was written by one person. Jn 21 seems to have been added after the gospel was completed; it exhibits a Greek style somewhat different from that of the rest of the work. The prologue (Jn 1:1–18) apparently contains an independent hymn, subsequently adapted to serve as a preface to the gospel. Within the gospel itself there are also some inconsistencies, e.g., there are two endings of Jesus’ discourse in the upper room (Jn 14:31; 18:1). ….
“Other difficulties for any theory of eyewitness authorship of the gospel in its present form are presented by its highly developed theology and by certain elements of its literary style. For instance, some of the wondrous deeds of Jesus have been worked into highly effective dramatic scenes (Jn 9); there has been a careful attempt to have these followed by discourses that explain them (Jn 5; 6); and the sayings of Jesus have been woven into long discourses of a quasi-poetic forum resembling the speeches of personified Wisdom in the Old Testament.”
>>There is also the matter of the Holy Spirit which proclaims truth to those in the family of God.>>
RESPONSE: Do you have any evidence of this or is it just wishful thinking. If the Holy Spirit inspired the gosple writers how come there are so many contraditions and errors.
Could you please learn how to quote properly, just like most others here? It would make your posts, and the points you're trying to make so much easier to read.
Here is the alive Jesus after the cross of Christ telling His disciples and other followers to go to Jerusalem .......Acts 1...``wait for the promise of the Father , which you have heard of me ..For John truly baptized with water , be you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days onward ........It is not for you to know the time or the seasons , which the Father has put in his own power ....But you will receive power after that the Holy Spirit is come on you and you will be witnesses of me both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and in Samaria and also the uttermost parts of the earth ``................................................ ...............Fifty days after the cross of Jesus Christ in Acts 1 and 2 .the Holy Spirit baptized all the people who came expecting to receive , and the Holy spirit is still baptizing Christians today with His spirit and His spirit is abiding on them and leading their lives ,........................ and I receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit 17 years ago and this is proof that Jesus died of the cross and the promises that followed ............................So if your a Christians and never received the baptism of the Holy Spirit then you need to seek the Lord and get this special baptism , as there will be power to be redeemed of sin and kick the demons spirits out who lie about everything all the time .................................. to those who need physical proof will only come to people who have changed lives where once they were living like the world and now they are free , like for example ,Now they don't drink alcohol or smoke or take drugs or selfish or evil proud and hate people or things that are not of God , so if Christians do these things than they need the baptism of Holy Spirit which Jesus promised after the cross before he ascended into Heaven
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
