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.

 

For anyone that has any doubt as to the identity of Jesus Christ

page: 10
7
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon


Would you mind explaining why?

I'll second that.
and
redirect people's attention back to my Jesus, based on Gospel of Thomas:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I think every one just stepped over him and went on to their own arguments.




posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by kallisti36
 


You wrote:

["Do you mean groups like the Manichaeans?"]

Making a guess on what post you refer to: Manicheans are not gnostics. Their two-god systems differed. Autonomous gnosticism is to this day surviving as mandaeans.

Quote: ["I don't think gnostic Yeshuah makes any sense.


There's a lot of the propaganda-material being produced by competing ideological factions, which doesn't make sense. Personally do I e.g. consider most of the pauline-oriented NT a scam concerning the theistic content.

But amongst none of the optional Jesus-versions is there any, what could be called conclusive evidence. Which is natural, when a faith is the subject, but even the various texts are questionable to some extent. The mandaeans considered John the baptist as the true messenger from the 'true god', and John allegedly being Jesus' cousin would make gnosticism a famility option, though the mandaea'ic version clearly points to rivalry between the Jesus faction and the John faction.

Quote: ["I think we can all agree that the historical Yeshuah (if you believe he existed) was Jewish and would have been very unlikely to have taught a gnostic cosmology."]

As was John and most of the mandaeans. Not all polish people are catholics, only (at least nominally) 90+%.





edit on 24-8-2011 by bogomil because: paragraphing



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil


The napkin is good inside cosmos, don't try to bring it with you 'outside'.

Said good advice completely ignored by all the 'rationalizing' theists, who have a need to 'prove' their faith (for conversion reasons?) and who turn the whole thing upside down. 'Inside' cosmos they ignore the napkin, 'outside' they try to bring it with them. The very sad examples of 'intelligent design', 'quantum religions' and the bible as 'objective', all of which just makes christian extremism look silly (unless you are a christian extremist, from where it looks brilliant).

I'm familiar with a few 'closed theological systems' which exist as bubbles, that is, all the elements fit together into a 'systematic theology'. If one element examined by itself turns out to be, or is admitted to be stupid, then the system falls apart like a house of cards, or the bubble pops, depending on which simile is being used.

The 'sad examples' you give would then be apologists standing outside the bubble, trying to argue on behalf of the bubble, to people outside the bubble. Those inside are glad and say, "Oh, I wish I could explain things that scientifically!" And the people outside make faces and laugh at the 'science'.

Did I read you correctly? If so, I'll clap and dance around and call myself 'brilliant'. If not, I'll scratch my head some more.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by kallisti36
 

Thirdly, nobody taught this legalistic view of atonement for the first thousand years of the Church's existence, until Anselm came along.
Here's a bit of a summary of his philosophy from Wikipedia.

His philosophy rests on three positions—first, that satisfaction is necessary on account of God's honour and justice; second, that such satisfaction can be given only by the peculiar personality of the God-man Jesus; and, third, that such satisfaction is really given by this God-man's voluntary death.
It would be necessary probably to read the whole section in the article to get what he was doing in creating a salvation theory.
Anselm



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   
this discussion makes me want to take a shotgun to my computer screen...


what i see here, is people who want others to believe as they do, just like religion,

my quote - no one is learning, everyone tries teaching.

i was born a catholic.... WAIT FOR IT.... yeah, i can only imagine the trolls coming out from under their bridges on THAT... anyhoo, i have long dicovered how to think for myself, but yes i have some seriously ingrained belief's... and some of them stem from what i was taught (or forced to learn) throughout 12 years of private catholic school, and yes feel free to blame me for being me, you know, when i was 10 i had every ability to say NO to going to church on sunday (yeah right)... but i am thankful for what i have learned through that type of private schooling, lesson plans are MUCH stricter than any public school i have since visited... but i have expanded and i doubt most would even comprehend, or want to comprehend, my belief system now.. that's a whole other discussion...

anyways, point being is this debate will go on long after we are all dead, and our children, and probably on to the next planet humans inhabit and destroy (at which time history will be destroyed again and this will also all start again), so no one should feel angry because they couldn't convince the next poster that their way is the right one...

but it does make me wonder... has anyone thought about who started this infinite debate? if you know the answer to that... then maybe you are jesus! no really, you are not..

but i must digress and reflect upon The Dude for further understanding... and The Dude says



The Dude: Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

www.imdb.com...
edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: add some goodness

edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


You wrote:

["Did I read you correctly? If so, I'll clap and dance around and call myself 'brilliant'. If not, I'll scratch my head some more."]

I believe, we get along very well in understanding, and any minor communication-breakdowns in method or outcome are not contest points. I have a great deal of respect for your and jmdewey's competence in your fields, and the talent for expressing it.

Don't mind the black humour, it's standard in many circles here.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   
and like seriously, i am trying to read through this, but all of the flawed thinking has me very perturbed.. don't get me wrong, my thinking is flawed like man, religion, science, etc (ultimately), but i would be the 1st to admit that i would be a hypocrite not to admit to being flawed...

what i do see a lot within some of the more hypothetical (hypocritical) responses is that some people can believe in certain types of history, depending on who wrote it, but other sources of history are not reliable? come on... picky choosy... really?? so the hieroglyphs of spacemen on the walls of giza are not enough evidence for you? but a pdf of obama's birth certificate makes it true? sorry if you don't follow, i am simply saying that i am reading a lot about how people believe one part of the history book, but not the other... same source... and wikipedia? i love it, don't get me wrong, but i also wrote half of it!!! not really, but by now the point has to be obvious...

sorry to all, i truly am enjoying this debate, it is just hard to decide which side of the fence to be on, i do like to play the devil's advocate... i am that guy at the crowded bar in nashville on a sunday afternoon with the raiders jersey on!
edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: grammatical



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by schitzoandro


but all of the flawed thinking has me very perturbed.. some of the more hypothetical (hypocritical) responses is that some people can believe in certain types of history

I haven't been following this thread completely, mostly just jumped in at the end. I have a difficult time with threads of more than 4 pages.

Anyway:


6) His disciples questioned Him and said to Him, "Do you want
us to fast? How shall we pray? Shall we give alms? What diet
shall we observe?"
Jesus said, "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."
- - Gospel of Thomas

I can explain what seems hypocrisy: It's lying! People often quote things which they have accepted as authority. They don't know these things to be true, they accept them to be true. If they don't know it they shouldn't quote it. Those preaching what they don't know are self blinded. Better to listen and examine for oneself.


5) Jesus said, "Recognize what is in your sight, and that which
is hidden from you will become plain to you.
- - Gospel of Thomas

Your quote, from a previous post:


no one is learning, everyone tries teaching.


I had a profound thought that I was going to insert here, but it slipped my mind.
edit on 24-8-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


i completely agree with you


and regarding the beginning of this thread... why does the discussion about jesus' identity bring in the dead sea scrolls?

www.ancientmonks.com...


The pure fact that the Dead Sea Scrolls don’t mention Jesus should debunk the theory that Jesus was himself an Essene. There are a handful of scrolls written after the life of Jesus, and it would seem that if Jesus was such a significant religious leader of the group that they would have written about him.


www.calvin.edu...


In his 2003 interim class on the scrolls, Pomykala's students learned why the non-biblical scrolls are valuable, too. "The scrolls don't mention Jesus, John the Baptist or any other New Testament person. But they shed light on the world of Jesus and remind Christians where they came from," he said.


... and from the OP's link...
www.centuryone.com...


22. Although the Qumran community existed during the time of the ministry of Jesus, none of the Scrolls refer to Him, nor do they mention any of His follower's described in the New Testament.


i have had a few profound thoughts myself... but i must've inserted foot in mouth instead

edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: add goodness

edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: grammar!!

edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: just to edit again..



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by schitzoandro


why does the discussion about jesus' identity bring in the dead sea scrolls?

That's merely an attempt to bolster the Old Testament as authority.

The OP is attempting to 'prove' Jesus is the Old Testament Messiah by comparing OT with NT claims of 'fulfillment'. It really falls apart upon examination. Such comparisons actually are evidence that Jesus is a fictitious character made up as an amalgam of 'fulfilled' prophecy.

I'll give my own example:


MT 2:16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:

MT 2:18 "A voice is heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because they are no more."



JER 31:15 This is what the LORD says:

"A voice is heard in Ramah,
mourning and great weeping,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because her children are no more."

JER 31:16 This is what the LORD says:

"Restrain your voice from weeping
and your eyes from tears,
for your work will be rewarded,"
declares the LORD.
"They will return from the land of the enemy.

The Jeremiah reference has nothing to do with slaughtered children, but rather, children taken captive.
But here's the kicker: Rachel was the mother of Joseph and Benjamin. How would that have anything to do with Judah, the tribe Jesus is said to descend from.

Matthew is full of such supposed fulfillments. The genealogy is mostly copied out of the Judean kings. Many of the succeeding kings were uncles or nephews, not sons. Many are dropped so as to end up with the 14 generation scheme.

People who use this method as proof make a mockery of the real man.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by schitzoandro
reply to post by pthena
 


i completely agree with you


and regarding the beginning of this thread... why does the discussion about jesus' identity bring in the dead sea scrolls?

www.ancientmonks.com...


The pure fact that the Dead Sea Scrolls don’t mention Jesus should debunk the theory that Jesus was himself an Essene. There are a handful of scrolls written after the life of Jesus, and it would seem that if Jesus was such a significant religious leader of the group that they would have written about him.


www.calvin.edu...


In his 2003 interim class on the scrolls, Pomykala's students learned why the non-biblical scrolls are valuable, too. "The scrolls don't mention Jesus, John the Baptist or any other New Testament person. But they shed light on the world of Jesus and remind Christians where they came from," he said.


... and from the OP's link...
www.centuryone.com...


22. Although the Qumran community existed during the time of the ministry of Jesus, none of the Scrolls refer to Him, nor do they mention any of His follower's described in the New Testament.


i have had a few profound thoughts myself... but i must've inserted foot in mouth instead

edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: add goodness

edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: grammar!!

edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: just to edit again..





Most of the new testament scripture was written at least 10 to 20 years after the death of Christ.

Most of the scrolls and fragments found amongst the dead sea scrolls were from the Old testament and were written in the ancient Hebrew language. Only very few fragments and scrolls discovered were written in Aramaic or ancient Greek.
edit on 24-8-2011 by XplanetX because: typo



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by schitzoandro


why does the discussion about jesus' identity bring in the dead sea scrolls?

That's merely an attempt to bolster the Old Testament as authority.

The OP is attempting to 'prove' Jesus is the Old Testament Messiah by comparing OT with NT claims of 'fulfillment'. It really falls apart upon examination. Such comparisons actually are evidence that Jesus is a fictitious character made up as an amalgam of 'fulfilled' prophecy.

I'll give my own example:


MT 2:16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:

MT 2:18 "A voice is heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because they are no more."



JER 31:15 This is what the LORD says:

"A voice is heard in Ramah,
mourning and great weeping,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because her children are no more."

JER 31:16 This is what the LORD says:

"Restrain your voice from weeping
and your eyes from tears,
for your work will be rewarded,"
declares the LORD.
"They will return from the land of the enemy.

The Jeremiah reference has nothing to do with slaughtered children, but rather, children taken captive.
But here's the kicker: Rachel was the mother of Joseph and Benjamin. How would that have anything to do with Judah, the tribe Jesus is said to descend from.

Matthew is full of such supposed fulfillments. The genealogy is mostly copied out of the Judean kings. Many of the succeeding kings were uncles or nephews, not sons. Many are dropped so as to end up with the 14 generation scheme.

People who use this method as proof make a mockery of the real man.




Are you seriously contending with the genealogy of Jesus according to the gospels?

The names that Matthew omits are the ones that Luke includes.


www.letusreason.org...

www.abetterhope.com...
www.abetterhope.com...
www.abetterhope.com...

www.arlev.co.uk...

www.complete-bible-genealogy.com...

I want to make it clear that I only use these references for the genealogy, nothing more.

I hope that clears things up for you and also for those that you are misleading.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by XplanetX
 

I want to make it clear that I only use these references for the genealogy, nothing more.
Why would you post links to it, then?
The first one made me a bit ill.
The prophecy of the serpent having its head crushed was fulfilled by the virgin birth. What?



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by XplanetX


Are you seriously contending with the genealogy of Jesus according to the gospels?

The names that Matthew omits are the ones that Luke includes.

I'm not the one making a thing out of the genealogy, Matthew is:


MT 1:17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Christ.

Some sort of numerology or something.

My Jesus doesn't need to fulfill any numerology or prophecy. Being a human person is enough.


I hope that clears things up for you and also for those that you are misleading.

Then you are willing to toss Matthew out as a liar? If that's not your point, then I confess that I don't know what point you have cleared up.

How can I mislead if I don't attempt to lead?

Bonus scriptures:


1TI 1:3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work--which is by faith.

TIT 3:9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.

Heb6:20 where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.

HEB 7:3 Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.


Disclaimer: I merely quote these verses for the specific subject matter. I in no way endorse them as "inerrant word of God".





edit on 24-8-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by XplanetX
 



Most of the new testament scripture was written at least 10 to 20 years after the death of Christ.
Most of the scrolls and fragments found amongst the dead sea scrolls were from the Old testament and were written in the ancient Hebrew language. Only very few fragments and scrolls discovered were written in Aramaic or ancient Greek.


i understand that, and although i do not read hebrew, aramaic or greek, i am still not sure what this has to do with what i was asking, and that is why would the dead sea scrolls be related to proof of jesus, when what has been found intact does not mention jesus? don't get me wrong, i truly believe there was a jesus christ, no matter the controversy, and i am not arguing who he was, son of god or conman, either way history would state that he was here on this planet... maybe he was an alien? again, i am not questioning who he was or if he existed, although i have read deeply into holy roman empire history, and i have read that he was idea to control the masses, and although it would sound good in theory, he is not equal to santa claus or the easter bunny even though family guy may lead us to believe differently... okay, i am rambling, there is too much to discuss here...

back me up, i believe in the person, the ideal, whatever you want to believe him to be, my point was the dead see scrolls, as far as i have read, all lead me to believe the same thing, jesus was not mentioned in them... that is what i am trying to understand, why did this thread take us towards the dead sea scrolls as proof to the identity of jesus?

let me also point out that being raised catholic, i had a teacher in 5th grade, one of the most influential people in my life, she taught me about the trust fall (you know, where you fall back and allow someone else to catch you), and she also taught me that the beginning of the bible is not necessarily true, that adam and eve was just a way to start a story.. YES, MY 5TH GRADE RELIGION TEACHER TAUGHT US THIS, AND I MUST MENTION SHE WAS FIRED THE FOLLOWING YEAR FOR JUST THAT... but she also taught us that this doesn't mean that everything else in the bible was false, and i highly believe there is some truth in there... no matter what it is mixed with, or who it was written by... i guess i am just saying that i do think that there was a man, his name was jesus, beyond that, with all i have been taught, i will not sit and argue about him... that is too much work, and i am no holy roller so i will not attempt to make you believe, i am only here for enlightenment, and the attempt to shed some, to those who will listen.. wow, now that sounded fairly jesus like
j/k

i am thoroughly enjoying this discussion, much appreciation to pthena and xplanetx for reading my posts and responding!

-please ignore any grammatical or syntax errors in this post, i am no longer at work, i am home on my laptop which doesn't remind me of mispells and is much harder to notice errors with a little 10 inch screen.. keep this rolling!
edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: add



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by XplanetX
 

I want to make it clear that I only use these references for the genealogy, nothing more.
Why would you post links to it, then?
The first one made me a bit ill.
The prophecy of the serpent having its head crushed was fulfilled by the virgin birth. What?





The seed of the woman will crush the serpent's head. The seed has already been born (Jesus).

The crushing of the serpent's head refers to a future event, this will occur when Satan is thrown into the lake of fire.

GE 3:15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel."


REV 20:4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

REV 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth--Gog and Magog--to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.


Satan (the serpent) struck the heel of Jesus through persecution and death, but Jesus rose again in fulfillment of the scriptures.


edit on 24-8-2011 by XplanetX because: Inserted relevant NT scripture



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by schitzoandro
reply to post by XplanetX
 



Most of the new testament scripture was written at least 10 to 20 years after the death of Christ.
Most of the scrolls and fragments found amongst the dead sea scrolls were from the Old testament and were written in the ancient Hebrew language. Only very few fragments and scrolls discovered were written in Aramaic or ancient Greek.


i understand that, and although i do not read hebrew, aramaic or greek, i am still not sure what this has to do with what i was asking, and that is why would the dead sea scrolls be related to proof of jesus, when what has been found intact does not mention jesus? don't get me wrong, i truly believe there was a jesus christ, no matter the controversy, and i am not arguing who he was, son of god or conman, either way history would state that he was here on this planet... maybe he was an alien? again, i am not questioning who he was or if he existed, although i have read deeply into holy roman empire history, and i have read that he was idea to control the masses, and although it would sound good in theory, he is not equal to santa claus or the easter bunny even though family guy may lead us to believe differently... okay, i am rambling, there is too much to discuss here...

back me up, i believe in the person, the ideal, whatever you want to believe him to be, my point was the dead see scrolls, as far as i have read, all lead me to believe the same thing, jesus was not mentioned in them... that is what i am trying to understand, why did this thread take us towards the dead sea scrolls as proof to the identity of jesus?

let me also point out that being raised catholic, i had a teacher in 5th grade, one of the most influential people in my life, she taught me about the trust fall (you know, where you fall back and allow someone else to catch you), and she also taught me that the beginning of the bible is not necessarily true, that adam and eve was just a way to start a story.. YES, MY 5TH GRADE RELIGION TEACHER TAUGHT US THIS, AND I MUST MENTION SHE WAS FIRED THE FOLLOWING YEAR FOR JUST THAT... but she also taught us that this doesn't mean that everything else in the bible was false, and i highly believe there is some truth in there... no matter what it is mixed with, or who it was written by... i guess i am just saying that i do think that there was a man, his name was jesus, beyond that, with all i have been taught, i will not sit and argue about him... that is too much work, and i am no holy roller so i will not attempt to make you believe, i am only here for enlightenment, and the attempt to shed some, to those who will listen.. wow, now that sounded fairly jesus like
j/k

i am thoroughly enjoying this discussion, much appreciation to pthena and xplanetx for reading my posts and responding!

-please ignore any grammatical or syntax errors in this post, i am no longer at work, i am home on my laptop which doesn't remind me of mispells and is much harder to notice errors with a little 10 inch screen.. keep this rolling!
edit on 24-8-2011 by schitzoandro because: add




The dead sea scrolls authenticate THE OLD TESTAMENT. This in turn authenticates Jesus as the messiah because he fulfills the relevant prophecies.

I have not bothered attempting to authenticate the new testament in this thread. The evidence is so overwhelming that it would be like reinventing the wheel.

debate.org.uk...



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by schitzoandro


i am thoroughly enjoying this discussion, much appreciation to pthena and xplanetx for reading my posts and responding!

I'll take that as license to answer even if your post is addressed to some one else.


she also taught us that this doesn't mean that everything else in the bible was false, and i highly believe there is some truth in there... no matter what it is mixed with, or who it was written by... i guess i am just saying that i do think that there was a man, his name was jesus, beyond that, with all i have been taught, i will not sit and argue about him...

So you have a Catholic education. Maybe you can identify this story, I can't find it in Google. But I did read it a few months ago, it involves a saint sitting in a church council, can't remember the names or dates.

The theologians were arguing and arguing and presenting their views on the relationship between Jesus the Christ and the Holy Spirit. The room was full of noise and racket, then the saint, who had been silent up to that point, loudly proclaimed: "I have seen him." Then the arguing stopped, and some doctrine was written down.

This story left me quite appalled. What's missing here? No one bothered to ask the saint what his thinking or opinion may be. Incredible! They just wrote down the majority opinion.

I will give my opinion unasked therefore. Jesus was an ordinary guy, not from a great house, not in line for some major position in his society. After he was gone, people realized that they had been witness to an extraordinary life. Therefore, to make him seem more important and worthy of notice, they fabricated out of "prophecy fulfilled" a bunch of titles: "Son of David", "Prophet like Moses" "Promised Messiah" "Ruler of the world with iron scepter" etc, etc, etc.

The extraordinary life and teachings of this man have been buried under layer after layer of OT garbage.

That is my opinion. I agree with your teacher. There is truth still within the gospel record if you navigate around the garbage.

I only read the Gospel of Thomas a couple of days ago. But when I read, I exclaimed, "Hey, I know this guy!"



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by XplanetX


Are you seriously contending with the genealogy of Jesus according to the gospels?

The names that Matthew omits are the ones that Luke includes.

I'm not the one making a thing out of the genealogy, Matthew is:


MT 1:17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Christ.

Some sort of numerology or something.

My Jesus doesn't need to fulfill any numerology or prophecy. Being a human person is enough.


I hope that clears things up for you and also for those that you are misleading.

Then you are willing to toss Matthew out as a liar? If that's not your point, then I confess that I don't know what point you have cleared up.

How can I mislead if I don't attempt to lead?

Bonus scriptures:


1TI 1:3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work--which is by faith.

TIT 3:9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.

Heb6:20 where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.

HEB 7:3 Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.


Disclaimer: I merely quote these verses for the specific subject matter. I in no way endorse them as "inerrant word of God".





edit on 24-8-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)



You are taking quarrels about genealogy out of context, this was written so that those with certain Jewish heritage would not boast.

2CO 11:16 I repeat: Let no one take me for a fool. But if you do, then receive me just as you would a fool, so that I may do a little boasting. In this self-confident boasting I am not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool. Since many are boasting in the way the world does, I too will boast. You gladly put up with fools since you are so wise! In fact, you even put up with anyone who enslaves you or exploits you or takes advantage of you or pushes himself forward or slaps you in the face. To my shame I admit that we were too weak for that!
What anyone else dares to boast about--I am speaking as a fool--I also dare to boast about. Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they Abraham's descendants? So am I. Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more. I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again. Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea, I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my own countrymen, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false brothers. I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked. Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches. Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn?

2CO 11:30 If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness. The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, who is to be praised forever, knows that I am not lying. In Damascus the governor under King Aretas had the city of the Damascenes guarded in order to arrest me. But I was lowered in a basket from a window in the wall and slipped through his hands.


Jesus is the high priest in the order of Melchizedek:

PS 110:4 The LORD has sworn
and will not change his mind:
"You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek."

PS 110:5 The Lord is at your right hand;
he will crush kings on the day of his wrath.

PS 110:6 He will judge the nations, heaping up the dead
and crushing the rulers of the whole earth.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


by all means, i absolutely invite any questions or answers... regarding the unquestioned doctrine... i have heard a similar story, but more than one, so i would not be able to identify this particular one, without a more specific siting of said story... books.google.com... =en&ei=CZRVTpvSIJGEtgfd8eSPAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=unquestioned%20doctrines&f=false

.. i am under the assumption that most doctrine is unquestionable, although after being entered most have become greatly questioned... it's kind of like the unspoken word of the catholic world i grew up in, yes we were asked to read from the bible, but the only person who ever lead me to read the revelations WAS my 5th grade teacher, although it wasn't until after my 8th grade year when she had a graduation get together at her home, in which many people showed up because of her influence on her students, regardless of what the school thought of her... point there is i never really questioned WHY we didn't read the revelations, my mother lead me to the answer many many years later. she had never read it either until i mentioned it to her, yes she had scanned it, but never looked at what was meant by it, and she was horrified! so that is why i believe catholicism didn't really lead us to look deeply into the revelations...
i would like to know what doctrine you speak of, sorry i couldn't be more help on that subject, but yes, when i was under the influence i never questioned anything, it wasn't until much later that what she had said about adam and eve really sank in...



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join