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.
I guess its about that time. Look I know for a fact God is real and so are his devils. I could tell you about my judgment. I could tell you how that lead to me being one of Gods chosen. I could tell you how coffee has been reheated in my cup just sitting on the table or while I hole it. I could tell you about the visions. And the varies Devils that have spoken with me since becoming Chosen.
But in the end since you did not see the vision. or there for my judgment and being chosen. You are in fact taking it on faith despite i tell you no lie. All those things are true about what i have experienced as a God Chosen.
Jesus, Mohammad, Moses, and other various well know Prophets all have one thing in common. They empowered a evil best. Moses gave you a law of slavery and a guide to murder in the end. If you do not believe it than read the law and there judgments Starting at Exodus chapter 20. It goes on for a few chapters.
So now that i know for a fact Devils have great power and Magic i must point this out to. Just because one becomes a prophet does not mean they are a prophet for God. All famous prophets of old fell for the Lessons of Devils best and empowered great evils as holy. Yes even Jesus for he taught his perfection in those commandments made him holy. But empowering evil is never holy.
A god came to him in the form of a flame. Than gave him the sign of the serpent in the power of his staff! Jesus said it was holy when it is not! Religious books are the mark of the beast. Unless you see why they are evil you are fallen. You see why those things are fallen you are not fallen. Its that simple. All religions! all of them are fallen. Jesus said the holy Ghost was holy. But she is the ***** of revelations! He left you to assume she was a man.
People laughed at the early apostles willingly dying for the name of Christ, as well. Yet....here we are 2000 years later and the church is alive and well.
Lots of Muslims have died and willingly die every day in the name of Allah
Lots of gullible people willingly died in Jonestown drinking poisoned Koolaid
Lots of Japanese willingly died for their Emperor who was a God on Earth
Lots of Germans willingly died for Adolph Hitler
Sorry, but having insane, brainwashed or gullible people willing to die for a person or cause does not make that cause valid or true.
Dead missionary John Chau did more to advance the "Jesus is Imaginary" cause than he will ever realize. His zeal for Jesus took him to a remote island in the Indian Ocean. His first words there were "I love you and Jesus loves you!" and
THUNK!
An arrow hits him and he dies.
So much for Jesus' promise to missionaries:
I guess Jesus forgot to cover things like arrows through the heart.
John, if you can hear me you should have thought of that before going to the island. Your own stupidity and blind faith in an imaginary Bible character killed you, not the arrows.
I'm sorry, but where does Jesus promise ultimate physical protection when we go out into the world and keep us from dying? Have you even read the Bible? Most of the apostles eventually were murdered for their faith. Christ didn't shield them. You can't really claim that Jesus failed John Chau without having God's perspective on the entire reality of existence. For all you know, John's death may have planted a seed in this people. Maybe a grandfather tells the story to the next generation of the white man who they should have spared. And then the next white visitor is now welcome, the gospel gets shared this time and these people are saved.
The reality is that all of our lives are brief quick blimps when compared to eternity. IF someone can make a difference for the kingdom of God in their time here then that is certainly a good thing rather than exiting this earth a few decades later.
Anyone who is taking some enjoyment in the fact that this man was murdered is disgusting, in my book.
However, other, more reasonable people, would call the killing of Chau self-defense, given the real threat Chau posed to the Sentinelese people. Not only was Chau determined to corrupt their culture with his ignorant Christian superstition, the arrogant and deplorable Christian missionary was also willing to expose the isolated tribespeople to disease and sickness they had no immunity to defend themselves against.
And I highlighted CHRISTIAN SUPERSTITION because there is no PROOF that this bully's interpretation of Christianity is the right one..after all he was a disciple of ORAL ROBERTS, the place that OUTLAWED inter-racial relationships--among other ignorant superstitious beliefs.
This BIGOTED BULLY forced himself into a society that had no desire to interact with him NOR were was the culture willing to accept the message that they were EVIL ad BAD living outside this bigot's version of Christianity.
Jesus was recognized to be God from the very beginning of the Church and is stated to be so both in the Gospels and by Paul. Paul wrote Philippians sometime during the period between the middle 50's and the early 60's. In Phil. 2:5-8 he writes that Jesus existed in the form of God and that he took the form of a bond-servant, being made in the likeness of man. This is similar to what John later wrote in John 1:1,14. But what Paul wrote in Philippians he surely believed soon after his Damascus Road experience which was no more than a year or two after Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection. And that Jesus was resurrected was stated in a very early creed or tradition that Paul received probably from Peter and James when he went to visit them three years after his conversion (Galatians 1:18). A tradition that he later referred to in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7. Neither Jesus' resurrection or his divinity are later inventions or legends.
I didn't say that non-fundamentalist historians believed that Jesus is God. I said that they believe that Jesus existed historically in response to your suggestion that there may not have even been an historical Jesus.
No, Irenaeus did not choose the names for the gospels. The four canonical gospels were all written during the first century and very probably were circulating as a corpus by the early 2nd century which was long before the pseudepigraphal Gospel of Peter which was rejected by the church. If the names that are attached to the canonical gospels were a later occurrence there would likely have been competing traditions regarding the authorship of the four gospels because by that time there would have been a wide distribution of manuscripts and there was no one centralized authorized authority over all the churches who could have directed what the gospels were to be called.
As for Matthew, I've already stated that despite being an apostle, he had been a tax collector. Tax collectors were hated by the Jews. And therefore, it would have made more sense for the church to have chosen a different name for the gospel in order to lend authority to that gospel unless Matthew actually was the writer.
And no, tradition does not place Mark c. 70 AD. That date is the opinion of many modern scholars. But there are also scholars who date it much earlier. No one knows the exact date for the writing of the gospels, but a very good argument can be made for a date around the early 60's.
The content of the gospels prior to the 4th century isn't relevant to the issue of who wrote the gospels. And even if your argument that Irenaeus chose the names of the four gospels was true, which it isn't, Irenaeus died c. AD 202 which is early 3rd century and therefore prior to Codex Sinaticus.
No, I have not told you or anyone else why people should NOT believe that Jesus was divine. Why would I do that when I believe that he was?
As for Psalm 91, the psalmist was convinced that there is security in trusting in God and he encouraged himself that he would be delivered from the attacks of those who would harm him. And it is true that for as long as God wants a person to remain alive that no one will be able to remove that person from this life. But there comes a time when God says that a person's time on this earth is up. And when that time comes he will die by whatever means. Now for the umpteenth time, Jesus never promised his disciples that they would be protected from death. You have been shown both in Matthew 24:19 and John 16:2 that Jesus said that his disciples would be killed. A fact you continue to simply ignore because it is an inconvenient fact which puts the lie to your argument.
Does anybody notice that Mike555 makes these grand sweeping statements and tries to pass them off as historical fact when they're nothing more than his own personal biased opinions? I can't possibly list them, they are too numerous. Here are a few:
1.
Quote:
Jesus was recognized to be God from the very beginning of the Church and is stated to be so both in the Gospels
Really, Mike????? The Christian Church was founded in 33 CE at Pentecost. The first Epistles didn't start appearing until 55 CE, 22 years later. So there's a 22 year gap between Jesus' supposed ascension and Galatians where we have absolutely nothing either in the Biblical record or the historic record about what people thought of Jesus. Upon which non-Biblical historic documents written by recognized historians of the day do you make this claim? If you can't name one feel free to say, "I don't have any. It's just my grand sweeping personal opinion."
As for the gospels show me in Mark where Jesus calls himself God, accepts worship as God, or acknowledges the worship of him as God from others? Quite the contrary Jesus' own family thought him insane as Mark states as early as 70 CE the ACCEPTED dating of Mark's gospel, not your biased 60 CE opinion:
Quote:
Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. When his family heard about this, they went to seize him, saying, "He is out of his mind." [He's gone crazy"] ["He is insane"]
God is insane! Brilliant!!
And this. Now watch---three, count 'em--THREE gospels in a row:
Quote:
"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone." Mark 10:18
Quote:
Jesus said, "Why do you ask me about what is good? There's only one who is good--[God alone]." Matthew 19:17
Quote:
"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone". Luke 18:19
So you can see, Mike. Right up to Luke, the third gospel Jesus tells people NOT to refer to him as God, only firstly the Son of man and then the son of God, until finally the Jesus legend morphs itself into Jesus as God in the gospel of John, the last gospel. It's a gradual evolution over the four gospels of making Jesus from a son of man, Mary and Joseph--into son of God--and finally into God. So Jesus was NEVER thought to be God from the very beginning of the Church.
2.
Quote:
But what Paul wrote in Philippians he surely believed soon after his Damascus Road experience which was no more than a year or two after Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection.
Really, Mike????? Upon which non-Biblical historic documents written by recognized historians of the day do you make this claim? Did Paul personally appear to you and tell you he believed Jesus was God from the Damascus road on? Can you find any supporting statements of this in Acts? Closest thing I can find in Acts is 9:20
Quote:
At once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God.
If you can't name a secular historic source feel free to say, "I don't have any. It's just my grand sweeping personal opinion."
3.
Quote:
the psalmist was convinced that there is security in trusting in God and he encouraged himself that he would be delivered from the attacks of those who would harm him.
Much like John Chau and Graham Staines and his two sons, Philip (aged 10) and Timothy (aged 6) encouraged themselves Jesus would deliver them from the attacks of those who would harm them, right? Or were the psalmist and John Chau and Staines merely using the Bible to delude themselves into believing God(Jesus) would deliver them from harm???????
We all saw what happened to them when they trusted Jesus to deliver them from the attacks of those who would harm them. Shot through with arrows and burnt to a crisp. That's what happens when you trust in an imaginary Biblical character to deliver you from the harm of others.
Last edited by thrillobyte; 11-26-2018 at 11:50 AM..
First this poor misguided young man breaks the law by going to a restricted island making criminals of the fishermen that took him there. Then he endangers a whole tribe of protected people by possibly exposing them to germs for which they have no immunity, and third his zealous brain washing that makes it okay to over reach into an-other's way of life is disrespectful.
His heart may have been in the right place but his head sure wasn't. I'm sure he would have opted to stay home if he had known in advance that his life would be over at such a terribly young age. Zealous over reach for the sake of spreading an ideology is fanaticism at it's finest.
Lots of Muslims have died and willingly die every day in the name of Allah
Lots of gullible people willingly died in Jonestown drinking poisoned Koolaid
Lots of Japanese willingly died for their Emperor who was a God on Earth
Lots of Germans willingly died for Adolph Hitler
Sorry, but having insane, brainwashed or gullible people willing to die for a person or cause does not make that cause valid or true.
Your argument fails to distinguish between those who die for a cause because of second hand beliefs about something which they themselves didn't witness, and those who die for a cause because they themselves were eyewitnesses to that which they proclaim. Even non-apologetic scholars and historians recognize that the disciples believed that they saw the risen Jesus even though those same scholars and historians can't say what it is that the disciples actually saw.
It is one thing to believe something because of passed down traditions. It is quite another thing to believe something because you yourself were an eyewitness. One person may believe in Bigfoot because of stories about Bigfoot. But another person believes in Bigfoot because he is convinced that he actually saw a Bigfoot. Now he may be mistaken about what he saw, but he was convinced that what he saw was Bigfoot. The apostles were convinced that what they saw was the resurrected Jesus and were willing to suffer and go to their deaths as at least some of them did, for proclaiming the gospel message about Jesus. People generally aren't willing to die for something they know to be false.
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.
Let Christian dissenters take this one on. 
The Christian Church was founded in 33 CE at Pentecost. The first Epistles didn't start appearing until 55 CE, 22 years later. So there's a 22 year gap between Jesus' supposed ascension and Galatians where we have absolutely nothing either in the Biblical record or the historic record about what people thought of Jesus. Upon which non-Biblical historic documents written by recognized historians of the day do you make this claim? If you can't name one feel free to say, "I don't have any. It's just my grand sweeping personal opinion." 
