It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So what if jesus was married with a wife and kids

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2006 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
No need to get testy here, darkelf.
First of all, I said "I believe". That does not constitute an accusation. Secondly, on page 2 of this thread, you said you were going to check some documents and get back to me on what you said was a "good question". You never came back and addressed it. I believed that indicated you didn't have or couldn't find the scripture to back it up. ("It" being Christ was married to the Church in the same way a man is married to a woman)

Lol, OK Benevolent Heretic, I really wasn’t getting testy, but I am glad we got that cleared up. The written word doesn’t always come across in the way I mean it to.

My apologies for forgetting to get back to you on that. One of the documents I was searching for was on the computer hard drive that ate itself. I’ve been able to find some of the others. Some of those contain doctrine that I no longer believe as I can find no scriptural validation for them. Let me give you what I have and we can go from there:

God chose a people to be His. The Jewish nation (sons of Abraham) was God’s original bride. He chose them for His own. In Jewish custom, it was the father who chose the bride. Jesus was espoused before He even came to earth.


King James Version
Jeremiah 2
1 Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying,
2 Go and cry in the ears of Jerusalem, saying, Thus saith the LORD; I remember thee, the kindness of thy youth, the love of thine espousals, when thou wentest after me in the wilderness, in a land that was not sown.

God knew that the Jews would reject Jesus as the Messiah. They were looking for a Messiah that would lead them out of bondage. They were looking for the Lion of Judah. What they got was the Lamb that takes away the sins of the world. When Jesus died and arose from the dead, that espousal was extended to all who believe in Christ Jesus.


King James Version
2 Corinthians 11
2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.


King James Version
Ephesians 5
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

We shall be one with Jesus, just as a husband and wife are one with another. Jesus taught parables using marriage. If He was married, I believe that He would have used His own marriage as an example. However, His parables of earthly marriage are allegories of His wedding to the church.


King Jame Version
Revelation 19
7Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.


This is my belief from my interpretation of the Bible. Other beliefs may vary.




posted on May, 23 2006 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That is the best so far. Thank you. It's clear that Paul intended that the Church was the wife of Christ just as a woman is the wife of a man. Is he the only one who speaks about this relationship?


Before I answer that, answer me this. What was Paul's relationship with Christ?



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Well, never mind. I didn't know there'd be a quiz.
I can google it and find out where else it's mentioned.

As far as I know, Paul was an Apostle. Some think there was a more special relationship between the two, a closer friendship. Some think Paul was gay and loved Jesus. Some think Paul played a very important role in starting the Christian religion. I don't know what you're asking for, but I'm not really into playing, "I'll answer yours if you answer mine."
If you don't want to answer freely, then don't.


Thanks darkelf.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Well, never mind. I didn't know there'd be a quiz.


Welcome to my world.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I can google it and find out where else it's mentioned.


That'd be great! I'd love to be in the passenger's seat for a change.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
As far as I know, Paul was an Apostle. Some think there was a more special relationship between the two, a closer friendship. Some think Paul was gay and loved Jesus. Some think Paul played a very important role in starting the Christian religion. I don't know what you're asking for, but I'm not really into playing, "I'll answer yours if you answer mine."
If you don't want to answer freely, then don't.


I'm trying to establish a point, but it's well missed if not first understanding Paul and Christ's relationship. I have no problem answering questions, though did not know I was not allowed to ask them. Funny how the discussion only works one way. I'll be looking forward to the google results and discussing them and thanks for taking the initiative.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
That'd be great! I'd love to be in the passenger's seat for a change.


I'm sorry. I assumed you knew the answer. I thought you liked sharing your knowledge of the bible and stuff. I certainly didn't expect you to run out and get the answer for me.

"I dont' know" is a perfectly acceptable answer. I can certainly find the answer myself if I want to. No need to have you driving me around.




I have no problem answering questions, though did not know I was not allowed to ask them.


Allowed? I don't allow or disallow you to ask. I just don't feel I'm under an obligation to answer some 'test' question in order to get an answer to my question. I'm not the expert here, nor am I a student of yours. But please note that I did answer your question.



Funny how the discussion only works one way.


That's BS. Your username is saint4God. You talk about the bible and religion as if you are an expert, and I believe you have a lot of knowledge about it. I asked because I thought you would know. You seem to like to talk about it, so since we were having this discussion, I asked a question.



I'll be looking forward to the google results and discussing them and thanks for taking the initiative.


I'm not going to research it further, because although curious, I'm not curious enough to search it out. It really doesn't matter to me. As I have said all along. I'm just curious.

If we were in a dog training forum and you were asking the questions, I'd gladly answer them if I had them or tell you I didn't know the answer. Putting conditions on answering the question, like...

saint4God: Why does my female hump my male?
Benevolent Heretic: I'll answer that when you tell me how to keep a dog from guarding his food.

seems like a stupid game and I'm not interested in playing.


I think I'm beginning to understand why I see you in so many confrontational discussions in here. Lesson learned.


[edit on 23-5-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I'm sorry. I assumed you knew the answer.


I'm sorry you thought I had memorized the Bible. I can get you the answer if you like, though could not refuse your offer...and, I'm still waiting your response on Revelation and Paul's relationship with Christ.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I thought you liked sharing your knowledge of the bible and stuff.


I do, moreso Bible than stuff though.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I certainly didn't expect you to run out and get the answer for me.


Good good, thanks.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
"I dont' know" is a perfectly acceptable answer.


I do not know offhand where I read it, but can dig. I believe it's a parable if that helps your search.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I can certainly find the answer myself if I want to. No need to have you driving me around.


Great! Then you get first hand info instead of the filter that is me. I'll even send you my Book if you'd like.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Allowed? I don't allow or disallow you to ask. I just don't feel I'm under an obligation to answer some 'test' question in order to get an answer to my question. I'm not the expert here, nor am I a student of yours.


The reason WHY I asked is because it HELPS to answer your question. But we're getting nowhere rehashing like this. Let's move on, shall we?


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That's BS.


What is?


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Your username is saint4God.


Very good.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You talk about the bible and religion as if you are an expert,


I never made this claim. My username is not IAM or ALPHA&OMEGA nor THE1TRUESON, and I've been pretty speedy in getting back to you. Maybe I should re-think my turn around times. I am not saint4BenevolentHeretic, nor am I under your employment with deadlines due. Don't follow me. Follow God, He's got ALL your answers.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
and I believe you have a lot of knowledge about it. I asked because I thought you would know. You seem to like to talk about it, so since we were having this discussion, I asked a question.


I could have dug in and got you that answer, but rather than regurgitate more scripture (as we've all seen how effective that's been) I've ask you to delve in a bit to discover a different paradigm. Darkelf already provided the answers, I'm providing an approach.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I'm not going to research it further, because although curious, I'm not curious enough to search it out.


"Seek and you shall find"


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It really doesn't matter to me. As I have said all along. I'm just curious.


Nothing wrong with that, darkelf has graciously provided a buffet. I've contributed a few dishes as well.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
If we were in a dog training forum and you were asking the questions, I'd gladly answer them if I had them or tell you I didn't know the answer. Putting conditions on answering the question, like...

saint4God: Why does my female hump my male?
Benevolent Heretic: I'll answer that when you tell me how to keep a dog from guarding his food.


If you cannot see the difference, then I am of no use to you.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
seems like a stupid game and I'm not interested in playing.


I'm not playing a game.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I think I'm beginning to understand why I see you in so many confrontational discussions in here. Lesson learned.


Just trying to help friend.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
I'm still waiting your response on Revelation and Paul's relationship with Christ.


I am unaware of a question on Revelation and I did answer your question about Paul's relationship with Christ:


Originally posted by saint4God
What was Paul's relationship with Christ?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
As far as I know, Paul was an Apostle. Some think there was a more special relationship between the two, a closer friendship. Some think Paul was gay and loved Jesus. Some think Paul played a very important role in starting the Christian religion.





Let's move on, shall we?


No, thanks.




Just trying to help friend.


Well, better luck next time.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Back and forth, back and forth, geez guys, aren't you bored yet?

You both are very articulate and intelligent, but there is no reason for a pissing contest here.

The Bible is a collection of stories that were written years after Jesus' death. We can all agree on this. Almost none of the accounts of Jesus can be said to be first hand. With that "fact," how can we choose to follow such writings, when the stories could have changed throughout the centuries? Even before the Bible was fully "published," the church still decided what was premature, or not fit, for the masses. Times are different, and I don't think it is best to fully believe in the writings of others, especially those 2000 years ago.

There is one way (I believe) that God communicates to us, not just one person, but to all of us. That is through emotion. It is one of the ways we experience God, the feeling of happiness, the feeling of joy. For how else do we truly appreciate life? How else do we want to reflect upon our own lives when we are old and hunched over? By knowing that we experienced love, joy, acceptance, blessings, and gratefulness.

Many say that the one greatest moment in their lives is the witnessing of the birth of their first son/daughter. Why is that? Because they have created something out of love. The ACT of love itself is supposed to bring creation.

That all being said, I guess I indirectly asked this question, since no one really answered me. So, I shall pose it as simply as I can:

If Jesus' teachings encompassed the unconditional love to everyone, to experience love from God, then how is he therefore denied the right to experience it himself?



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mouth
Back and forth, back and forth, geez guys, aren't you bored yet?


Yes!




With that "fact," how can we choose to follow such writings, when the stories could have changed throughout the centuries?


I don't.




If Jesus' teachings encompassed the unconditional love to everyone, to experience love from God, then how is he therefore denied the right to experience it himself?


It seems to me that Jesus did experience love. Perhaps not the love of a woman, but since I wasn't there, I don't know. But one thing I do believe is that God (if there is such a thing) is Love. So what many people call God, I call Love.

And just so you know, I really wasn't trying to have a pissing contest. Eeewww! I was asking questions about the bible of a person who seems knowledgeable in that field. That is all.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic



It seems to me that Jesus did experience love. Perhaps not the love of a woman, but since I wasn't there, I don't know. But one thing I do believe is that God (if there is such a thing) is Love. So what many people call God, I call Love.

And just so you know, I really wasn't trying to have a pissing contest. Eeewww! I was asking questions about the bible of a person who seems knowledgeable in that field. That is all.


Fair enough. I mean, we will never know, ever, really. Everything is speculation. And I think you are 100 % right... God is love. And for us to experience Him, we therefore need to experience love.

The pissing contest comment was just a stupid joke, sorry. Furthermore, I think it is kind of ironic to ask someone a question about the bible, when it should be your own interpretation, not someone elses, that you should learn from. Not to say that everyone should read the Bible, cause even though I believe the Bible sends a great message to the public, I firmly believe that it should not be taken literally. It is nice though to hear what other people have to say, and listen to other people interpretations. You will never experience the life of others... but you will experience your own life. So, take it for what it's worth.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 07:21 PM
link   
One day in the future I can just imagine a scholar saying.

If it's not in the Google, it didn't happen.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mouth
The difficulty with the Bible is that they are stories written by man. The Word of God is interpretated by man, and that interpretation changes as society changes. Things are VERY different when jumping over 2000 years later. Do you honestly think our outlook on religion and science will be the same 2000 years from now? God... How primitive will we look in that future?


I am not an expert but I believe that the Bible was inspired by God. Not everything makes sense when I first read it. However, as I study it more, I gain a better understanding. I would never believe in a God who could not control how His word is translated.


Originally posted by Mouth
About Jesus having a family... I believe (and that doesn't make it true, because everyone has the right to believe whatever they want to) that one of the most important aspects of the Word of God is love. I don't know about anyone else, but being in love, and knowing that you are loved back, is the most important thing in life. It really is the purpose of life... to experience love. Jesus' teachings upheld the unconditional love of everyone... including the sick and disabled. He loved them all.


The most important teaching is love! How do we define love? Who do we love most? For me the list goes:

1. God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit)
2. My husband
3. My children
4. The rest of my family
5. My friends
6. Everybody else

There is a different type of love for each on the list. I am incapable of loving everyone the same way. Jesus is not. He loves you just as much as He loves me. For Him to marry would say that He loved someone more than anyone else. I cannot find any scriptural reference that says that He played favorites. He even called His mother woman rather than Mother as He was dieing on the cross.


Originally posted by Mouth
If he "made woopie," then awesome for him, because instead of putting a taboo on sexual energy (like catholics like to do) we should be embracing it, and channeling it properly. So, why should that exclude Jesus?


It would exclude Jesus because He did not come here to make whoopee. There is nothing wrong with sex. Sex is not a sin. God uses sex as a metaphor for spirituality. Sex in marriage is allegorical to our intimacy with God. Sex outside of marriage is allegorical for worshiping anything other than God.


King James Version
Hebrews 13:
4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge


Originally posted by Mouth
Why would Religion be sooooooo against procreation if it is the progressing of our race? The WHOLE point of us, I think for us, is the CONTINUATION of our race.


Control maybe? I really don’t know. I only know that the Bible is not against it.



Originally posted by Mouth
This is one of the reasons why I do not understand hatred towards other people. The fact remains that millions of years from now, the sun, our sun, will swallow the entire solar system. That being said, we need to get off of this rock sooner or later. So why the heck are we not working together? because there is no immediate danger (save an asteroid hitting us). I mean, what do we care? We aren't gonna be around for that, so whatever, right?


I’m not sure where you are going with this.


Originally posted by Mouth
The Bible is a collection of stories that were written years after Jesus' death. We can all agree on this. Almost none of the accounts of Jesus can be said to be first hand.


Would you agree that the original accounts could have been copied and that the copies are all we have left?


Originally posted by Mouth
With that "fact," how can we choose to follow such writings, when the stories could have changed throughout the centuries? Even before the Bible was fully "published," the church still decided what was premature, or not fit, for the masses. Times are different, and I don't think it is best to fully believe in the writings of others, especially those 2000 years ago.


So are you suggesting that we throw out the entire Bible because it is old? Does it have nothing to say for us today?


Originally posted by Mouth
There is one way (I believe) that God communicates to us, not just one person, but to all of us. That is through emotion. It is one of the ways we experience God, the feeling of happiness, the feeling of joy. For how else do we truly appreciate life? How else do we want to reflect upon our own lives when we are old and hunched over? By knowing that we experienced love, joy, acceptance, blessings, and gratefulness.

Many say that the one greatest moment in their lives is the witnessing of the birth of their first son/daughter. Why is that? Because they have created something out of love. The ACT of love itself is supposed to bring creation.


One (or two) of my greatest moments was childbirth. My greatest moment was when I realized the love God has for me. It was emotional but totally overwhelming as I felt His love. No one on earth could love me like that. And I didn’t have to do anything to deserve it.


Originally posted by Mouth
That all being said, I guess I indirectly asked this question, since no one really answered me. So, I shall pose it as simply as I can:

If Jesus' teachings encompassed the unconditional love to everyone, to experience love from God, then how is he therefore denied the right to experience it himself?


He does experience it. Each time we turn away from selfishness and turn to Him, He experiences it. As I have said before, it is difficult for me to explaine the infinite with my finite mind.

Like I said, I am no expert. I hope I have answered your questions.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mouth
If Jesus' teachings encompassed the unconditional love to everyone, to experience love from God, then how is he therefore denied the right to experience it himself?


If He's God, then nothing is denied Him. It's kind of a moot point. God knows/experiences all in ways we cannot even fathom. Actually having married to experience earthly love would surely be a let down compared to to divine love I would think. I just see it it as so ridiculous to view it as Jesus having been denied something if he wasn't able to "know a woman" in the bibical sense.

but then, that is just my take on it.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   
First; I am in no way an expert on the Bible, but Paul, considering who he was, was basic Christian 101. Depending on the translation he is either Paul, or Saul who is also known as Paul. Some refer to him as Saul until his conversion and then as Paul thereafter. He was not one of the original twelve apostles but became one after the resurrection. He was probably the most evil persecutor of Christians in history. Until..................................

"Act 9:1 And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,
Act 9:2 And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.
Act 9:3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:
Act 9:4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
Act 9:5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
Act 9:6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
Act 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
Act 9:8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.
Act 9:9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.
Act 9:10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
Act 9:11 And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,
Act 9:12 And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.
Act 9:13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
Act 9:14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
Act 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
Act 9:16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
Act 9:17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
Act 9:18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
Act 9:19 And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.
Act 9:20 And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.
Act 9:21 But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests?
Act 9:22 But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ.
Act 9:23 And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him:
Act 9:24 But their laying await was known of Saul. And they watched the gates day and night to kill him.
Act 9:25 Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket.
Act 9:26 And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple.
Act 9:27 But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus.
Act 9:28 And he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem.
Act 9:29 And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him."

Many of the quotes from the New Testament I see on these strings are from epistles authored by him.

To those who are asking questions out of genuine desire to know the truth and not as a ruse to persecute Christians for our beliefs "Ask and ye shall recieve". Literally.

To those that are here to persecute, You are not supposed to understand. Understanding the Word is being withheld from you. "Cast not your pearls among swine".

To those that are Christian "shake the dust from your feet" and find the willing.

[edit on 23-5-2006 by Blaine91555]



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 11:05 PM
link   


As far as I know, Paul was an Apostle. Some think there was a more special relationship between the two, a closer friendship.

Paul had no relationship with R. Jeshua and little with the church @ Jerusalem later.
What he did have was a vision on the way to Damascus ( some say Qumran) when he got drunk and fell of his ass.

Many scholars today believe that only 8 of the epistles were actually written by him,
the rest were by associates and companions. He was also the one that perverted the
true teachings of R.Jeshua and founded the church we have today. (IMO)



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 11:23 PM
link   
The Gospel of Mary reports that several of the disciples were none too impressed by Mary's purported insights into heavenly things. Andrew responded to her revelation by saying "I at least do not believe that the Savior said this. For certainly these teachings are strange ideas" (section 17). Then Peter asked, "Did he really speak privately with a woman and not openly to us? Are we to turn about and all listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?" But Levi speaks up for Mary, "Peter, you have always been hot-tempered. Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries. But if the Savior made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the Savior knows her very well. That is why he loved her more than us" (section 18).

Ah, at last, here's fuel for the fire of a secret marriage between Mary and Jesus. She is the recipient of his secret revelations and private speeches. The Savior, who is not called Jesus in The Gospel of Mary, even preferred Mary to the other disciples, loving her more than them. Mary's relationship with Jesus has clearly entered a new dimension we have not seen before.

Mary is praised in The Pistis Sophia as one "whose heart is more directed to the Kingdom of Heaven than all [her] brothers" (Chapter 17, trans. Carl Schmidt and Violet MacDermott). Jesus says that she is "blessed beyond all women upon the earth, because [she shall be] the pleroma of all Pleromas and the completion of all completions" (section 19). In other words, Mary will have the fullness of knowledge and therefore spiritual life within her. So impressed is Jesus with Mary's spiritual excellence that he promises not to conceal anything from her, but to reveal everything to her "with certainty and openly" (section 25). She is the blessed one who will "inherit the whole Kingdom of the Light" (section 61).

Nothing here openly mentions marriage, but imagine what they would have done to Mary if there
was any chance that she was carrying the legacy of Jesus' bloodline.
It does make sense that Jesus and the remaining deciples would take steps to protect her any way possible.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkelf
I am not an expert but I believe that the Bible was inspired by God. Not everything makes sense when I first read it. However, as I study it more, I gain a better understanding. I would never believe in a God who could not control how His word is translated.


Everything is inspired by God, not just the writings of the Bible, as we are all part of His Divine Plan.


Originally posted by darkelf
The most important teaching is love! How do we define love? Who do we love most? For me the list goes:

1. God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit)
2. My husband
3. My children
4. The rest of my family
5. My friends
6. Everybody else

There is a different type of love for each on the list. I am incapable of loving everyone the same way. Jesus is not. He loves you just as much as He loves me. For Him to marry would say that He loved someone more than anyone else. I cannot find any scriptural reference that says that He played favorites. He even called His mother woman rather than Mother as He was dieing on the cross.


To each his own, but I am for loving everyone just the same... absolute. Jesus' teachings were not meant to show how to love only your family, but to love EVERYONE just the same (as you pointed out.) That type of love was not only for Him, but for everyone to experience.


Originally posted by darkelf
It would exclude Jesus because He did not come here to make whoopee. There is nothing wrong with sex. Sex is not a sin. God uses sex as a metaphor for spirituality. Sex in marriage is allegorical to our intimacy with God. Sex outside of marriage is allegorical for worshiping anything other than God.


How does anyone have the right to determine what is, and what is not acceptable in the eyes of God? We will never know what God "approves" or "disapproves" of until its too late. People who believe that sex is a sin, well, I feel sorry for you, because in my eyes, that is denying you a loving experience that is one of the purposes of life.


Originally posted by darkelf
I’m not sure where you are going with this.

Well, I guess this is for a different thread.


Originally posted by darkelf
Would you agree that the original accounts could have been copied and that the copies are all we have left?

No, I would not agree. we will never know. I mean, they could have... So, using a judicial perspective, you cannot prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt. Its all about the faith. I refuse to argue about the authenticity of the Bible, because it (I feel) is meant to be interpreted individually, not read by one person who then decides what it means for everyone.


Originally posted by darkelf
So are you suggesting that we throw out the entire Bible because it is old? Does it have nothing to say for us today?


Read above.


Originally posted by darkelf
One (or two) of my greatest moments was childbirth. My greatest moment was when I realized the love God has for me. It was emotional but totally overwhelming as I felt His love. No one on earth could love me like that. And I didn’t have to do anything to deserve it.


Congradulations, I envy you. I can't wait for my first child to be born. I already know who my partner is, so, its just a matter of time
.


Originally posted by darkelf
He does experience it. Each time we turn away from selfishness and turn to Him, He experiences it. As I have said before, it is difficult for me to explaine the infinite with my finite mind. Like I said, I am no expert. I hope I have answered your questions.

You have given me insight as to how others think, and showed me part of your faith. So, yes, you answered my question,



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mouth
If Jesus' teachings encompassed the unconditional love to everyone,
to experience love from God, then how is he therefore denied the right to
experience it himself?


John - In the beginning was The Word; and the Word was with God;
and The Word was God.

Christ was there at the creation of everything. He already created us.
Everytime someone is concieved he has the experience that you
described. He has no need to have the joy of seeing his DNA
continued through offspring. His joys are far above that.

He knows us all better than we know ourselves. He knows us all
intimately. All of us. Our births; our lives; our deaths. Intimately.
He doesn't have to be alive in human form to 'get a feel' for
these things. He already feels these things for all of us at all times.

He hasn't been denied anything. He's experiencing it all.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkelf
I am not an expert but I believe that the Bible was inspired by God. Not everything makes sense when I first read it. However, as I study it more, I gain a better understanding. I would never believe in a God who could not control how His word is translated.


I wanted to expand on this more. Have you ever read Conversations with God? If not, I highly reccomend it. It is a 3 book series, most definitely condemned by the church, but basically is a dialogue between a distraught man and God Himself. One of the very first topics in the first book is how the Word of God is the worst form of communication. Because of bad interpretation, the Word is misunderstood and mistaken all the time. Since so many people have different takes on the Bible (and all other holy scriptures), who is right? It is a very interesting take on our relationship with God. As long as you have faith in something, awesome. Because that fact remains is that we will never know for sure, most definitely not within our lifetime, and chances are right afterwards our perspective will be a whole lot different.

How can God "control" how we translate His Word, if he gave us free will? Is that not then a contradiction? How can He say, "You have the freedon to do as you must, but wait, you must follow these guidelines to live life?!" Would that not defeat the whole purpose of this "life?"

P.S. the CWG series may or may not be a fabrication, who knows... but anything that personally brings you closer with God is holy scripture in my eyes.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I believe that people like you and FF and darkelf have your
own opinions on it but really don't have the scripture to back
them up. And that's ok.


Do YOU have any scripture that says Christ was married and had kids?

The scripture I have posted showed Christ's mission. They show that
He knew why He was here. They show that He wouldn't have taken a
wife and made children knowing that He was to die young ... leaving
them orphans and a widow. They show that he is not in need of
'experiencing' marriage to be able to relate to us.

If you have any scripture quotes that show differently ... please
post them.
I don't have a jesus-sex-phobia or anything.
I just don't see any scripture that says he was married; had kids;
or that He would need to do such.

I'm not being snotty ... I'm just saying that I don't see it anywhere.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join