Your Questions on Christianity Answered, page 6

Pages: << 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 04:09 PM by mayabong

Hi thanks for this thread.

I have 100 oz of silver. From what I understand, Jesus was sold for 30 pieces of silver. How many Jesus's can I buy today with my 100 oz?

Awaiting your reply.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 04:16 PM by HenryPatrick

How is it that the worlds largest religion sprung up around an imaginary person?

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 04:19 PM by Akragon

Why is the OP not actually answering any questions?

I thought that was the idea of this thread

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 04:51 PM by trisvonbis

Questions about christianity ?! Wow. Your problem is one; I have none. Christianity, as any other religion, is nothing but a pile of bs. Never did anything good for Humanity, doesn't, and it will never do. Illusions for weak, ignorant people, to the benefit of the learned crooks. Live in it, sleep in it, roll in it. Your choice. Just don't bother the rest of us.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 06:05 PM by SorensDespair

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
reply to post by SorensDespair

So what you're essentially saying is that the bible is not believable.
I can go with that.

Depends on what you mean by believable. If you want to use it as a scientific textbook, then I think you're doing it wrong. If you want to use it as a history textbook, then I think you're doing it wrong. If you want to read its parables and apply them as a way to live life, that's not so bad (provided you understand the cultural context and adapt it appropriately to modern culture).

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 06:14 PM by SorensDespair

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree

Originally posted by Dr Cosma

If God knows all then he did not create Adam and Eve so they would not procreate, just them two prancing around a magical garden naked, because after all, God knows all. So he knew that he would kick em out and he know they would procreate. Why?

Answered already in a roundabout way. It brings glory to His name. It allows for free-will...ie choice A) follow God, choice B) rebel....or in the case of Judaism, it was Lucifer's job given from God to test humans.

I think I have to disagree with you here, on a few points.
Point The First) At no point in Genesis is the serpent in the garden referred to as Lucifer. If it were, and it was put there to test humans, then there would be no need to punish the serpent for doing its job. It tells the reader that A) obey God, or be punished, or B) obey god and be punished.

That brings about the larger issue. It is said that the serpent is more cunning than any other of God's creatures. And, if the serpent's word is more believable to man than God's, then what does that tell you about God's word (imperfect).

Whether Christian or Jewish, Genesis 3 is an outright kick in the forbidden fruit with regards to the legitimacy of God's omnipotence and omniscience.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 07:48 PM by sprocket2cog

reply to post by ShakeNBake

Shakenbake, im not a Christian, make sense ?
Your views arent compelling enough, the differance is that i dont think my way or the highway..

where as christians thik their way is the only way...
i now which god "i" want to follow

My "god" doesn't want you to convert to save your self.. as we are all the same and there is no need to give glory to the "man" (jesus) to reach the afterlife.
thanks for the story guys, lets hope this thread helps people discover religion, no matter what path it is.
peace and bleesed be.

edit on 19-4-2011 by sprocket2cog because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 09:20 PM by swordwords

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree

Originally posted by swordwords
Here is a simple one. Why does the genealogy of Christ in the Gospel of Matthew not agree with the genealogy of Christ in the Gospel of Luke?

A number of reasons...but all speculation and nothing solid or concrete, to which I'm sure will be the main point of future attacks...

Possbilities
1) Joseph had two fathers, one natural and one legal.
2)Differences in genealogy ie one inheritance and one biological
3)Luke's genealogy is of Mary's paternal ancestry
4)Mattew's genealogy is of Mary's paternal ancestry

There are a number of reasons over the centuries that have been provided. In fact, this discussion first began in the third century AD...there are possible answers out there if you're willing to seek them out.

A2D

So, in other words you know that the two conflicting genealogies are not in error, but you don't know why. What a wonderful logic. I have seen these "take your pick" explanations offered by Christian apologists many times and it strikes me as a copout.

Your first two choices are apparently based on Eusibius' explanation in Book 1 of his Church History and they actually seem more reasonable than the last two, however, for some reason, they have gained less acceptance.

In regards to the second 2 choices, since it is Joseph's name and not Mary's that is included in the genealogies, you are suggesting that the Bible contains a lie and if you can admit to one lie, then perhaps there are many more. Perhaps you might wish to suggest that the lie is for the sake of tradition that requires a male name, but did not Christ accuse the Pharisees of "Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition..."(Mark 7:13a).

Then of course there are the four missing kings in Matthew's genealogy. If these kings really existed, then omitting them, represents a deception (if not an error) no matter what excuse offered.

However you look at it, something is fishy here.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 09:28 PM by aboutface

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by aboutface

This statement refers to the mind and thoughts, generally we put our faith in the mind and our thinking ability.
We believe the mind is the master.
When the truth is seen the mind becomes the 'slave' to the true master.

I think you're missing my point. Christ used the very word "slave." And he spoke of "returning a slave to his master." It just blows my mind that he used the very example of slavery itself, and one which reinforces the point of returning a slave to his master. I know he used it to illustrate another point. But the fact that he used that very example without denying it says he believed in it. I believe that teaching reinforced his belief in slavery.

Had he not believed in it, he would surely have taught that it was wrong. After all, slavery changed the whole history of many countries and peoples. I really consider this a major flaw in his teachings, and I think it weakens the christian argument therefore that there is only one path to God.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 10:42 PM by SorensDespair

reply to post by aboutface

Jesus Christ.
Slavery in ancient Rome can't be compared to slavery in the new world. Different times, different standards. In fact, in many cases, the only way a poor person could receive a regular meal, a warm home and, sometimes, even the ability to read and write (which was rare in the ancient world) was to become someones slave.

And you know that Jesus was using slavery as a metaphor, so I believe you're just nitpicking.

In addition to that, as Christianity grew, the process of baptism allowed slaves and emperors alike the same value in God's eyes, so, if anything, Christianity allowed for a balance where imbalance existed before.

This is coming from a black agnostic, btw.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 10:57 PM by ShakeNBake

Originally posted by amaster

Originally posted by ShakeNBake

Originally posted by amaster
Please explain why "god" would create a world full of "his children" with the intentions of testing thier faith in him by constant oposition in the hopes that they prove thier love for him through unending devotion? I don't know about you, but I would NEVER treat my children like that. I mean, if love, devotion and obediance is what he wants, then why were the angels not enough to stroke his ego? Instead, he had to create us, his toy.

Adam and Eve were tempted by Satan. They ate from the tree which God told them not to. That is why our faith is tested. If Adam and Eve never bit the apple, we would be genetically perfect, and the world would be perfect.

And God created Satan to temp people. So from the very start, God knew the outcome.

Would you give you child a knife to play with? No, because you know he or she would cut themselves.

Satan or Lucifer was an angel. He had free will and he chose to rebel against God. Lucifer was his best angel until he rebelled. Know the facts before you post.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:00 PM by ShakeNBake

Originally posted by sprocket2cog
reply to post by ShakeNBake

Shakenbake, im not a Christian, make sense ?
Your views arent compelling enough, the differance is that i dont think my way or the highway..
where as christians thik their way is the only way...
i now which god "i" want to follow
My "god" doesn't want you to convert to save your self.. as we are all the same and there is no need to give glory to the "man" (jesus) to reach the afterlife.
thanks for the story guys, lets hope this thread helps people discover religion, no matter what path it is.
peace and bleesed be.

edit on 19-4-2011 by sprocket2cog because: (no reason given)

Your choice is your choice, but I'm telling you its not the way. Satan will feel you a lake of truth with only an ounce of lies. And that'll get ya.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:01 PM by ShakeNBake

Originally posted by trisvonbis
Questions about christianity ?! Wow. Your problem is one; I have none. Christianity, as any other religion, is nothing but a pile of bs. Never did anything good for Humanity, doesn't, and it will never do. Illusions for weak, ignorant people, to the benefit of the learned crooks. Live in it, sleep in it, roll in it. Your choice. Just don't bother the rest of us.

Really never did anything? Whats the bs? Read the ten commandments and tell me if they should not be followed.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:02 PM by ShakeNBake

Originally posted by HenryPatrick
How is it that the worlds largest religion sprung up around an imaginary person?

Whos imaginary? There are more non biblical accounts for Jesus than there are for Julias Cesar. Jesus existed and thats FACT.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:06 PM by SorensDespair

Originally posted by ShakeNBake
Satan or Lucifer was an angel. He had free will and he chose to rebel against God. Lucifer was his best angel until he rebelled. Know the facts before you post.

A few points:
1) If I remember correctly, not a single canonical text, Jewish or Christian (outside of the Ethiopic, but I doubt you're Ethiopian Orthodox) names Lucifer as the devil.
2) Reference to fallen angels exists in the Book of the Watchers, which is in 1 Enoch, which was removed from the canon because it had an origin story that contradicted Genesis. So, if you use Genesis as a source, you can't use the Book of the Watchers as a source.
3) But even then, he's not referred to as Lucifer or Satan, but Samael. The only Christian sources that refer to Samael are 'gnostic' sources, who put him in league with Ialtaboath, the demiurge who created the Earth in Genesis and created the forms of Adam and Eve. But, in those texts, the serpent (again, not referred to as Lucifer) is the only creature who told the truth and was on the side of humanity.

So, what was that about facts?

edit on 19-4-2011 by SorensDespair because: Forgot a close parenthesis and my OCD kicked in.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:11 PM by sprocket2cog

reply to post by ShakeNBake

So what your telling me its not "your" way, which is your choice, but thanks again for showing me what i already "know", that some relgions feel the need to stress their importance over others just to be "right".
and besides the "devil" is part of the Christian mythos, not mine.
enjoy your journey, i will enjoy mine.

Oh and SorensDespair, your right

the way the terms for evil the devil , lucifer, satan and many others are mixed up by layman's never ceases to amaze me.

edit on 19-4-2011 by sprocket2cog because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:30 PM by FarBeyondDriven69

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree

Originally posted by FarBeyondDriven69
Can you tell me what parts of the Bible were made up by men and what parts of the Bible are the real words of GOD? Is the story about Jesus in the Bible true if so what parts and did he live on after he woke from the dead and if he did, did he have a wife and kids here on earth where the Bible leaves off? Why are some people born rich and others poor some beautiful and others ugly, if I was a god that loved my creation I would have been fair and made everyone beautiful and made everyone able to become equally wise so why didn't our GOD? Can you tell me why God don't come down and talk to the people that pray for his help and pray to him asking for his guidance in there lives, I mean if GOD would just tell me what he wants me to do I would try my best at doing it for sure.
Thanks, o and are you just saying what you have learned from the Holy Bible that has been corrupted and changed by man?
I fergot about the whole book of Gineses If you would please start at the begining and cover the whole thing it would be really awesome
I would also like to know about EZEKIEL'S WHEELS and what he really seen???
Thanks
edit on 19-4-2011 by FarBeyondDriven69 because: Added more

It doesn't matter what parts were "made up by men". The issue at hand is the law. Jesus says that not one jot or tittle will pass from the law until all(prophecy) is fulfilled. Focus on the law and everything is a lot clearer because the laws HAVEN'T been "made up".

As far as Jesus, yes it's true. No he did not "live on" in the way that you expect after His resurrection. It wasn't a "bodily" resurrection so He couldn't have a wife and kids.

And for the rich/poor/ugly/beautiful nonsense...we all have to overcome something. There's adversity in life, that's the pure and simple fact. Whether it be someone being born rich that has to overcome the huge obstacle of forgetting about their possessions and striving to compound treasures in heaven...or someone poor having to struggle here on earth for a piece of bread...someone "ugly" struggling to make friends and fit in...or someone beautiful struggling to fit in with the new trends and keep up with what's "in"....This is just the way life is.

A2D

Thanks believe it or not that helps me allot. I hope one of you will answer my other questions in time. Thanks again

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:35 PM by ShakeNBake

Originally posted by SorensDespair

Originally posted by ShakeNBake
Satan or Lucifer was an angel. He had free will and he chose to rebel against God. Lucifer was his best angel until he rebelled. Know the facts before you post.

A few points:
1) If I remember correctly, not a single canonical text, Jewish or Christian (outside of the Ethiopic, but I doubt you're Ethiopian Orthodox) names Lucifer as the devil.
2) Reference to fallen angels exists in the Book of the Watchers, which is in 1 Enoch, which was removed from the canon because it had an origin story that contradicted Genesis. So, if you use Genesis as a source, you can't use the Book of the Watchers as a source.
3) But even then, he's not referred to as Lucifer or Satan, but Samael. The only Christian sources that refer to Samael are 'gnostic' sources, who put him in league with Ialtaboath, the demiurge who created the Earth in Genesis and created the forms of Adam and Eve. But, in those texts, the serpent (again, not referred to as Lucifer) is the only creature who told the truth and was on the side of humanity.

So, what was that about facts?
edit on 19-4-2011 by SorensDespair because: Forgot a close parenthesis and my OCD kicked in.

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. Isaiah 14:12-15

Lucifer is Satan who was cast down from heaven,

Now to prove that he was the serpent:

And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years. Revelation 20:2

All sources come from the King James Version.

Does than answer your question?

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:36 PM by SorensDespair

reply to post by FarBeyondDriven69

If you're interested in an early theological perspective on the formatted method of the laws of Moses and other OT stuff, you might want to read Ptolemy's letter to Flora. It attempts to reconcile the seemingly awkward methods of OT law.

reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:40 PM by sprocket2cog

Originally posted by ShakeNBake
Lucifer is Satan who was cast down from heaven,

Lucifer was a name for the light bearer, venus the morning star.

" In Latin, from which the English word is derived, Lucifer means "light-bearer" (from the words lucem ferre). It was the name given to the dawn appearance of the planet Venus, which heralds daylight"

en.wikipedia.org...

and the passage you qoute Isaiah 14:12-15
"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. "

that relates to " the king of Babylon, a man who seemed all-powerful, but who has been brought down to the abode of the dead ("Sheol"). Isaiah promises that the Israelites will be freed and will then be able to use in a taunting song against their oppressor the image of the Morning Star, which rises at dawn as the brightest of the stars, outshining Jupiter and Saturn, but lasting only until the sun appears. This image was used in an old popular Canaanite story that the Morning Star tried to rise high above the clouds and establish himself on the mountain where the gods assembled, in the far north, but was cast down into the underworld"
see the same link above The_Morning_Star_in_Isaiah_14:12 section

edit on 19-4-2011 by sprocket2cog because: (no reason given)