It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: WakeUpBeer
Its a matter of faith, not evidence. I have enough evidence to prove that all biblical prophecies have been fulfilled up to the 70th Week, but you wouldnt understand it even if I had a way to present it to you.
Perhaps rather than chasing our tails in a debate, you should ask God for the truth. Your not going to convince me of anything, I've already done my homework on whether or not I believe.
Right now, I'm trying to figure out a way of proving how long we have left before its "pencils down". I already have an idea of how long, but I'm convinced the proof is metered in Matt 24.
originally posted by: bb23108
a reply to: Answer
Hello again. In considering all the posts here relative to whether Jesus existed or not, I think the argument relative to Jesus' demonstration as a spiritual master and his esoteric teachings indicate that he did in fact exist.
Here is my earlier post on Jesus as Spiritual Master and his Esoteric Teachings
I didn't see a response by you to this earlier post, but if you actually consider what Jesus taught relative to the God-Light, Spirit transmission, the spiritual laws of love, unity, non-dualism, being born again, etc., you may well understand that no ordinary Joe or set of Joes came up with all of this esoterica on their own.
Back then people could not just go read the latest teachings from the East on non-dualism, communion with God, etc. - like we can today. Jesus' Teachings absolutely parallel certain of the great traditions of the East, particularly the guru-disciple traditions.
His working with disciples, transmitting his Blessing, and drawing them into the Light above the world (the "Kingdom of God") was not something any of the disciple(s) just came up with. Their accounts of Jesus' Blessing in their lives in terms of being born again of the Light, could not be faked, especially given their parallels to what is understood about the esoteric aspects of the body-mind, etc.
There is also no way some ordinary group of people back then came up with the demands inherent in the two great commandments. Those two commandments are a total demand for living a life in communion with God.
Again, if many more Christians would take to heart Jesus' actual esoteric and exoteric messages, and his requirements in this life - rather than just choosing the "easy-believer's way" of affirming a belief in Jesus and their salvation when they died is guaranteed(!) - their whole orientation to Christianity could change. It could become a real daily practice in life, of loving God and neighbor, of real divine communion - not just affirming one's beliefs in Jesus and eventual salvation, as though that actually changes one at a real heart-depth.
Jesus would be appalled at how Paul revised his way in his name. Paul wasn't even with Jesus! Paul obviously made this huge revision for the sake of building up the Christian religious institution, because his revision was much less demanding than Jesus' actual way, so that worked for the masses. Unfortunately, the true teachings of Jesus were all but forgotten.
That Jesus was a spiritual master who actually existed can be assumed from his demonstration with his disciples, their calling him Master, his teachings, especially the two great commandments, and the testimonies of the disciples of his esoteric work with them, being born again in the Light, etc.
originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
Perhaps rather than chasing our tails in a debate, you should ask God for the truth.
Why is destroying Christianity so important to you folks? For a bunch non-believers, ya'll sure spend a lot of time obsessing over it.
originally posted by: Answer
The people who twisted his story into a symbol for an organized religion would not have had the spiritual wherewithal to conjure up Jesus' core message.
Except when you look into that claim further, it's not as clear-cut as you make it out to be.
Before you try to bash my source, the same information can be found from many sources.
For example, Remsburg's list of 42 historians during or shortly after the supposed times of Jesus who should have, but did not record anything about Jesus, apostles, or any supposed acts that we find only in the Bible, (which was improved upon in 2012 with the book No Meek Messiah,
Whether an influential man named Jesus or some other variation of the name lived around the time period is not the point. The point is whether or not the gospels are giving an accurate depiction which is exactly what I mean by "if he did exist." All other Jesuses living at that time are irrelevant.
originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
Now you have decided to redefine the sentence "if he did exist," because I think you have realized its just silly to say there wasn't an influential man named Jesus who lived in 1st century Palestine.
I already answered that question. God gave His Law to show that we are "mark missers" (that is what sin means) and cannot live by that law. Jesus came to live that Law for us to prove Himself a worthy atoning sacrifice for our sins. If you love Jesus, then you'll obey Him and believe that He came to pay for your sins, so that the barrier between you and the Father could be removed. Once you have that love for God within you, then you can love your enemy, then you can forgive your brother. But if you dont obey Jesus' command to believe in Him, then it is because you do not really love Him.
Oh? So you know sin? Care to enlighten us what exactly all the sins are?
Jesus is clearly stating that He and the Father are One and prays that "all of them" may also see that they are One. This is non-dualism.