"Jesus is a liar"

page: 14
8
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   
YOU MY FREIND ARE GOING STAIGHT TO HELL HOW DARE YOU TALK ABOUT YOUR MAKER LIKE THAT YOU FOOLISH LITTLE SHEEP.YOU ARE A DEVIL WORSHIPPING PIG. JESUS IS YOUR FATHER, HE CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH, AND ALL THINGS GOOD.YOU NEED BIBLE STUDY . IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMEWHERE IN YOUR LIFE YOU LOST FAITH ,THATS A SCARY,POSISTION TO BE IN.WHEN YOU WAKE UP IN THE MORNING DO YOU THANK SATAN FOR YOUR LIFE,MOST LIKELY YOU ALONG WITH MANY OTHER IDIOTS DO. HOPE YOU LIKE A VERY HOT ,PUNISHING, SCREAMING IN PAIN LIKE VACATION CAUSE YOU GOING THEIR WHEN YOU DIE.I HAVE ONE MORE THOUGHT FOR YOU MY DECIEVED FRIEND, I WILL PRAY FOR ALL OF YOU OUT THEIR THAT ARE BLINDED BY DARKNESS, CANT SEE THE LIGHT IF IT WAS INFRONT OF YOUR FACE, WHY BECAUSE YOU LIKE MANY OTHERS DONT HAVE FAITH IN YOU TRUE FATHER JESUS CHRIST,AGAIN YOU AND OTHER IDIOTS OF THE WORLD THAT PUSH JESUS AWAY YOU NEED HELP BEFORE ITS TO LATE. REPENT AND ASK JESUS TO FORGIVE YOU HE WILL IF YOU ARE PURE OF HEART.




posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by powski
 



probably should have early on ...but it was acknowledged near the end of page two....thxs for keeping the ole' guy on his toes....it's an old thread...



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Belle
 


Are you suggesting that Jesus has to be God because god is forced to die on the cross for peoples sins? That only if God dies on the cross for their sins they can be saved?

Is this not to suggest that God is not all powerful? That god is unable to just say "well hey, I forgive you all" and needs to do all this?

If Jesus is the truth, the way an the light, then the sacrifice of Jesus is a sacrifice of truth, the way and the light to save the lie, the broad path and the darkness. Which 2000 years of recorded history confirms.

You can find further proof in the bible itself which tells of the Pharisees conspiring against Jesus because he was a threat to their power.

This religion based on this sacrifice is the religion of Satan. The sacrifice of truth, so that the lie may live. And boy does it.

Jesus says true believers will be persecuted until the end. And yet, the most powerful nation in the world will only elect leaders who claim to be Christian. How can this be true? Did Jesus lie? Or did the church lie?

How does this Church gain power after the death of Jesus in his name to go about killing people who don't go along? Is that not prophecy fulfilled?



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by NOTurTypical
And what about the secular accounts of Jesus Christ? Are you aware historians other than those in the scripture also attest to the fact Jesus did in fact walk the Earth? It appears not. Google "secular accounts of Jesus Christ".


Yes, many of us HAVE checked the evidence.
And there are NO contemporary historians who mention Jesus.
Which is why you didn't cite any.


Kapyong



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Gday all,


Originally posted by NOTurTypical
"Jesus never claimed to be God"??????
You guys don't know your scripture too well....


How many scriptures were written by Jesus?


John 8:24 - "I said therefore to you, that you shall die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you shall die in your sins."
John 8:58 - "Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.'"
John 10:30 - "I and the Father are one."
John 9:35-38 - "Jesus heard that they had put him out; and finding him, He said, "Do you believe in the Son of Man?" He answered and said, "And who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?" Jesus said to him, "You have both seen Him, and He is the one who is talking with you." And he said, "Lord, I believe." And he worshiped Him."


Mate - that's a BOOK of stories about Jesus, written long after the alleged events, by someone who never met Jesus.



Rev. 1:17 - "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades."


Revelation?
A bizarre mish-mash of magical nonsense, written by an unknown mad-man who never met any Jesus.


Kapyong



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Cornelius Tacitus (AD55-120) wrote that Pilate sentenced this Jesus to death. He was the foremost Roman historian of his time. The Annuls were written 14 years after Christ's death. Are we to assume this great historian couldn't get his facts straight a mere 14 years after the fact?


14 years?!
Wrong.

Apologists keep doing that - emphasizing the BIRTH date of a writer in an attempt to lessen the time between them and Jesus. As if Tacitus learned about Jesus in the year of his birth and wrote his Annals (not annuls) before his first year of age ! How silly.

In fact, Tacitus wrote in early 2nd century - a good EIGHTY YEARS after the alleged events.

80 years, not the 14 you falsely claimed.
(Did you really think Tacitus wrote when he was age ONE ?!)


So - what does Tacitus say ?


TACITUS (c.112CE)

Roughly 80 years after the alleged events (and 40 years after the war) Tacitus allegedly wrote a (now) famous passage about "Christ" - this passage has several problems however:

* Tacitus uses the term "procurator", used in his later times, but not correct for the actual period, when "prefect" was used.

* Tacitus names the person as "Christ", when Roman records could not possibly have used this name (it would have been "Jesus, son of Joseph" or similar.)

* This passage is paraphrased by Sulpicius Severus in the 5th century without attributing it to Tacitus, and may have been inserted back into Tacitus from this work.

This evidence speaks AGAINST it being based on any Roman records -
but merely a few details which Tacitus gathered from Christian stories circulating in his time (c.f. Pliny.)

So,
this passage is NOT evidence for Jesus,
it's just evidence for 2nd century Christian stories about Jesus.


Kapyong



[edit on 8-2-2009 by Kapyong]



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by Chrystostomus
As others have rightly pointed out on this thread the canoncially approved gospels (copies made post Nicene Council of 325)


Just a quick point -

the Council of Nicea did NOT have anything to do with chosing the books of the Bible - it's an urban legend, not true.


Kapyong



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Mate - that's a BOOK of stories about Jesus, written long after the alleged events, by someone who never met Jesus.


Actually the Essenes were around at time of Christ, and they were the scribes the ones who wrote the dead sea scrolls, which Jesus was written of in same, but the Roman Church does not want info released.

Although not exact they concur with bible,



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Gday,



Originally posted by Chrystostomus
The (4) canonical 'Nicene Council Approved' Gospels were voted in by a show of hands


Why do people keep repeating this completety FALSE CLAIM ?!
Please folks - go CHECK this claim !

It's false.

The Council of Nicea did NOT have ANYTHING to do with chosing the books of the Bible. They never even discussed it.

Repeating this false claim shows you don't bother to check your facts, but just repeat anything you hear.


Kapyong



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
SO...with all that said...we have only two LOGICAL outcomes. No religious double-talk here) Either you BELIEVE or you REJECT. Really no other options right? If you believe, then to you HE IS LORD. If you REJECT there are really only two options for you.

1) JC knew he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LIAR

2) JC didn't know he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LUNATIC.

That's the only three logical outcomes...LIAR, LUNATIC of LORD. There is no room for him being a good guy and all, no room for him being a prophet as every other religion on the face of the earth calls him.

Why isn't there a third option of those who survived after his death/came along after his death chose to re-interpret his words in a manner not consistent with what was actually spoken? This could have been because of ignorance, avarice or narcissism!

My question is why omit this alternative?



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 02:12 AM
link   
You operate from a flawed premise........He is Lord regardless of my or your opinion. It is not an election, you don't get a vote. Jesus never wrote any part of the Bible so it is impossible to put a lie into his mouth. The New Testament is what people said about him, what they remember him saying and/or doing. Jesus knew that his disciples were lacking in understanding, they had trouble with earthly knowledge and heavenly knowledge was beyond their grasp. My opinion.....The price Jesus has to pay for sin was longer than the lifespan of Adam and Eve combined, roughly 1930 years. I think Jesus told the disciples this and "they" metaphorically made it three days (a day with God being equal to a thousand man years) I think every part of the Gospels and Acts that goes beyond the crucifixion is made up......God literally created Adam and Eve, the Son and Daughter of the Father but he could not forgive them because in a sense it would legitimize SIN. They were very repentant but their virginity was lost. To eradicate that SIN another Son of God must pay the price of their lifetime of SIN day for day. Jesus voluntarily did that. God withdraws from SIN for it is a corruption much the same as you or i would draw back from something that smells really bad, thats why you have to clean up your act if you are seeking salvation. You got immortality but you don't have first class accomodations or assured seating. When you get halfway through forever all those immortals have to have some place to go. You are probably gambling that i'm wrong, right? You bet your immortal soul?



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 05:06 AM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by googolplex
Actually the Essenes were around at time of Christ, and they were the scribes the ones who wrote the dead sea scrolls, which Jesus was written of in same, but the Roman Church does not want info released.


Let's see if I have this right -

The Vatican has the ONLY contemporary historical evidence for Jesus,
but they kept it a secret ?

It's secret,
but YOU know about it ?

Riiiight.

Kapyong



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kapyong
Gday,



Let's see if I have this right -

The Vatican has the ONLY contemporary historical evidence for Jesus,
but they kept it a secret ?

It's secret,
but YOU know about it ?

Riiiight.

Kapyong

There's nothing secrect about it, but for one thing the dead sea scrolls were in pretty bad shape, but if you were up with this you would know dead sea scrolls concur with Bible.
Hows your Hebrew or Sanskrit.
If you don't think the Roman Catholic Church, is power to deal with then you really are not aware of what your talking about.

[edit on 8-2-2009 by googolplex]



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   
if i remember correctly josephus only mentioned the christus. not the man from galilei or jesus of nazeruth or whatever. he could've been talking about anyone.

there's more than those three choices. you're assuming that everyone is going to believe what the book says to start with. i'm assuming that you don't think it's ok to kill homosexuals and children that lie to their parents. and i'm also asumming that you don't believe in 7 headed dragons and emerald thrones that 1,000s of people will sit around and sing the same song for eternity in?

oh and let's not forget the giant city of gold that's 1200km cubed. don't be so droll as to tell me what's symbolism and what's not, like you'd know.

it's just a book, and it's a very good one as far as books go. believing in it does not make it true. i believed 2001 space odessy when i read it, does that make it true? it wouldn't be any good if you didn't believe it.



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by googolplex
There's nothing secrect about it,


But YOU said the Vatican does not want the info released!
If they don't - why do YOU have it?
Where can we CHECK your claims?

In fact -
The DSS were written before Jesus ever came along
Jesus is NOT mentioned in the DSS anywhere.
Which is why you failed to produce any evidence.

Can you support your claim with actual evidence of Jesus being mentioned in the DSS?



but for one thing the dead sea scrolls were in pretty bad shape, but if you were up with this you would know dead sea scrolls concur with Bible.


False.
If you HAD studied the DSS as I have, you would know there are many many differences between them and our later MSS. Even the famous Isaiah has numerous changes.

But faithful believers are the last to know this, and they keep preaching this completely false claim without ever checking the facts.

If you are capable of checking the facts, googolplex, have a look at this site which lists some of the DIFFERENCES in the DSS
www.bibleandscience.com...

One example :


4Q242

Even before the discovery of the DSS, Wolfram von Soden posited that the stories about Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 3 and 4 were actually stories told about Nabonidus. According to ancient Mesopotamia sources Nabonidus was the father of king Belshazzar, not Nebuchadnezzar as Daniel 5:2 states. Nabonidus was absent from Babylon for ten years in Taiman, Arabia, during which his son Bel-sharra-usur governed (See ANET-Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 306-11).

A Fragmentary DSS text 4Q2424 also called 4Q Prayer of Nabonidus, shares similarities between Neo-Babylonian texts and Daniel 4:22-37. The fragment refers to Nabonidus (nbny), king of Babylon, who had a evil skin disease by the decree of God for seven years in Taiman. A missing part of the text may have told about his acting like a beast (See Frank Cross, "Fragments of the Prayer of Nabonidus", IEJ 34 (1984) pp. 260-64).

Neo-Babylonian texts also tell about Nabonidus falling ill and recovering in Taiman (Tema, ANET, 306-15). There is also a story of Nabonidus making an image to be worshipped. "He had made the image of a deity which nobody had ever seen in this country. He introduced it into the temple he placed it upon a pedestal" (ANET, 313). Nabonidus also sees a vision.

It seems that 4Q242 preserves a tradition that pre-dates the Biblical text of Daniel. It seems that a scribe copying (or redacting) the Book of Daniel changed the name of the lesser known Nabonidus to the better known Nebuchadnezzar who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple. 2 Maccabees 9:5-27 may be trying to compare Antiochus IV with Nabonidus legends as does Daniel (D. Mendels, "A Note on the Traditions of Antiochus IV's Death," IEJ 34 (1981) pp.53-56; Charlesworth, The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls, Vol.1, p.141).




Originally posted by googolplex
If you don't think the Roman Catholic Church, is power to deal with then you really are not aware of what your talking about.


A feeble attempt to change the subject.

YOUR claim is that the Vatican has information about Jesus being in the DSS that they don't want released.

This claim is obviously wrong, because the DSS were written BEFORE Jesus and have nothing about him at all.

Which is why you failed to provide an example.


Kapyong



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by argilla11

Why isn't there a third option of those who survived after his death/came along after his death chose to re-interpret his words in a manner not consistent with what was actually spoken? This could have been because of ignorance, avarice or narcissism!

My question is why omit this alternative?


Becuase it is completely illogical...but I'll go with it and explain why I don't hold to this...

Point 1 - JC was pretty messed up right?
Point 2 - Who would have nursed him back to health? His friends of course...
Point 3 - OT you mean the dozens and dozens who ALLOWED themselves to be matryed...in his name?
Point 4 - Yeah that doesn't add up...


JESUS CHRIST IS WHO HE SAID HE IS...OR A FOOL TO BE SHUNNED! No room for just a good dude....good dudes don't lie and live in psych wards...



edit: after re-reading it again, let's try this again...did he rasie from the dead in your question, if so the answer obvious...did he not in your question....then it all pointless...I'll leave the top answer as well...

[edit on 8-2-2009 by OldThinker]



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Kapyong
 


Kapyong...Congrats you won the winner of the most posts in an OT thread where you never talk to me!!!


Unless I forgotten...that's the second thing to go...can't remeber the first!



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Kapyong
 

The Church took control of dss in begining.

One of things Church does not want out is said Christ did not die on cross.

But hate to say it on most part Bible seems to be book of lies and made up things that are contradictions to each other and if view thru logic, is no logic.

But form what I have read Christ never said he was God, Son of God maybe.
s1.islamhouse.com...



[edit on 9-2-2009 by googolplex]

[edit on 9-2-2009 by googolplex]

[edit on 9-2-2009 by googolplex]



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by googolplex
I have read Christ never said he was God, Son of God maybe.
s1.islamhouse.com...

[edit on 9-2-2009 by googolplex]

[edit on 9-2-2009 by googolplex]

[edit on 9-2-2009 by googolplex]


2 tiny words?

I

AM



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
“Jesus was a liar!!!!!”



Jesus was Lord.
So am I.


Christ!





new topics
top topics
 
8
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join