Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What if Jesus is the DECEPTION?

page: 16
18
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:09 AM
link   
GOD'S LOVE FOR ISRAEL IS ETERNAL!!!--JEREMIA 3 14-17 ‘Turn, O backsliding children,’ saith the Lord, ‘for I am married unto you; and I will take you, one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion.

15 And I will give you pastors according to Mine heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and understanding.’

16 “And it shall come to pass when ye be multiplied and increased in the land, in those days,” saith the Lord, “they shall say no more, ‘The ark of the covenant of the Lord.’ Neither shall it come to mind, neither shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it, neither shall that be done any more.

17 At that time they shall call Jerusalem the Throne of the Lord, and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the Lord, to Jerusalem; neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart.




posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 

There is a penalty when we do wrong, both in the eyes of Man AND the eyes of God. For God, that penalty is death. A truly just God cannot simply pretend that sin didn't happen. Thus, a death is due.
That was the Medieval way of viewing things based on influences from the Roman Imperial justice system.
Even in the Old Testament law, there were refuge cities established for wanted criminals, and there was plain banishment.
Also in connection with the Day of Atonement, there was the scapegoat that took sin guilt away from the habitation of men.
The sort of thing that you seem to be supporting by this presentation of logic is the substitutionary penal atonement theory that was originally written about by Augustine, a trained polytheist "pagan" who later in life took on the Christian nomenclature.
According to the New Testament, God can forgive sins simply by forgetting them.
What this theory you are espousing does, essentially, in my opinion, is to superimpose an unnamed authority higher than God, that must be appeased in its demand for payment for sins, where God has no choice other than to offer his son in order to meet the payment due.
edit on 12-7-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



What this theory you are espousing does, essentially, in my opinion, is to superimpose an unnamed authority higher than God, that must be appeased in its demand for payment for sins,


Wouldn't that be exactly what you see in the OT?

Placing one's sins on the body of an innocent animal... thus removing the persons sin debt through the blood of the innocent...

something only a wrathful sadistic being would ask of another...




posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


NOPE

WRONG WRONG WRONG........
:shk:

The Case Against The Case For Christ: A New Testament Scholar Refutes the Reverend Lee Strobel


Leading New Testament scholar Robert M. Price has taken umbrage at the cavalier manner in which Rev. Lee Strobel has misrepresented the field of Bible scholarship in his book The Case for Christ. Price exposes and refutes Strobel's arguments chapter-by-chapter. In doing so he has occasion to wipe out the entire field of Christian apologetics as summarized by Strobel. This book is a must-read for anyone bewildered by the various books published by Rev. Strobel.


Be careful who you listen to. And who you recommend.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Logarock
 

I thought Paul was going on about gentile adoption under the law to show that gentiles were always "grafted" into Israel be it spiritual or under the law.
If you read the pertinent verses, rather than listening to biased preachers who always misquote the passage, Christians are not grafted into Israel, they are directly grafted into the same thing that Israel was, only the 'Israel' branches are cut off to make room.



I do an have read it myself. Cant say the same for you. Even Jesus Himself is referred to as a branch off the house of Jesse. Even Jesus, His branch in the stock of Judah and Israel is not in question.

Paul knew the writings of the prophets well and understood that is was going to be difficult to explain how the New Israel could be reconciled to the Old considering that their were prophet issues concerning the seed of Jacob that were yet to be, even to this day, fulfilled. The branches are not cut off......remember we are talking fruit tree here not grape vine.

Paul even warned the gentiles not to look down on the Jews. He said "has God cast off His own people? God forbid".



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 

Wouldn't that be exactly what you see in the OT?

Placing one's sins on the body of an innocent animal... thus removing the persons sin debt through the blood of the innocent...

something only a wrathful sadistic being would ask of another...
No.
The Bible is not really all that clear as to the exact procedure that happened, such as on the Day of Atonement. I know that probably seems weird to some people, but that is a recognized fact by biblical scholars.
The general idea in the OT is one of holiness vs. defilement, where you have this thing in the midst of the nation that is holy, such as the wilderness tabernacle, and God can show up in that certain place. The fact that you have also people showing up at that same general place too, adds an element of defilement to it that is accumulative, where after a set amount of time, in order to preserve the place's holiness, it has to be purged of that defilement.
That accumulated unholiness is then gotten rid of by a certain set of rituals, that then, if done correctly, will be judged by that God as now being acceptable to return for another certain determined amount of time.
As far as the actual people go, they have to be holy on their own, or the god will refuse to allow Himself to be the representative of that people, being just too unholy to get anywhere near to.
edit on 12-7-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 

I do and have read it myself. Cant say the same for you.
Well in that case, I would recommend that you go to Romans 11 and read it again, with the thought in mind of testing what I said as being right or wrong, not just relying on the memory of reading it while under the influence of a cult preacher sermonizing on the greatness of a supposed Old Testament Israel.
edit on 12-7-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


NOPE

WRONG WRONG WRONG........
:shk:

The Case Against The Case For Christ: A New Testament Scholar Refutes the Reverend Lee Strobel


Leading New Testament scholar Robert M. Price has taken umbrage at the cavalier manner in which Rev. Lee Strobel has misrepresented the field of Bible scholarship in his book The Case for Christ. Price exposes and refutes Strobel's arguments chapter-by-chapter. In doing so he has occasion to wipe out the entire field of Christian apologetics as summarized by Strobel. This book is a must-read for anyone bewildered by the various books published by Rev. Strobel.


Be careful who you listen to. And who you recommend.

There really are no, or barely any, serious scholars in all of worldly academia that doubt the existence of Jesus, except for me 2-3 individuals......

good luck on that one. The few who have published some heavily refutable evidence that he did not exist, are usually the folks doing speeches about their books where they simply make of God, Jesus, believers, etc....but put out weak arguments.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by borntowatch

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by borntowatch
Where does Jesus call us to worship Him,. or even pray to Him?

Other issues I will question after an answer to this
edit on 9-7-2013 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)


Matthew 15 8:-9 "This people draws near to me with their mouth, and honors me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men".

John 14:13 "You can ask for anything in my name, and I will do it, so that the Son can bring glory to the Father."



So are you suggesting that Jesus is asking us to worship Him??
and as for prayer

Jesus teaches humanity the Lords Prayer as the ideal prayer.
Starts with Our Father in heaven....

You can dispute that if you like.
Yes ask God in Jesus name, I dont deny that.
I dont read anywhere Jesus asks us to pray to Him.

I dont think praying to Jesus is bad or a heresy or anything, scripturaly we are taught to pray to the Father.
No biggy though
edit on 11-7-2013 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)


Yet still we have Jesus plainly stating that what you ask in His (Jesus) name, He (Jesus) will grant. That does sound like prayer to me.

Perhaps the distinction between the persons of God is only your interpretation.

We have definitions of ourselves as Id, Ego & Superego. Perhaps, in God, we have something vastly more complex, deep and profound? More like a community of complete persons rather than a singularity with various personal like aspects.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by chr0naut
 


Are you sure that you have read the Bible ? Or did you skim the bible ? Either way you have missed what Jesus is about just like so many other non believers who quote other people who do not follow Jesus ..



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by dominicus

There really are no, or barely any, serious scholars in all of worldly academia that doubt the existence of Jesus, except for me 2-3 individuals......

good luck on that one. The few who have published some heavily refutable evidence that he did not exist, are usually the folks doing speeches about their books where they simply make of God, Jesus, believers, etc....but put out weak arguments.


You are right about that. There is enough evidence to support that Jesus was a real person.

However, there is no evidence that anything he is said to have said or done in the New Testament actually happened. Nor if any facts about his life are true other than the fact that he did have biological brothers.

By the time the first of the original books of the New Testament were written, Jesus had been dead for somewhere between 30 and 50 years.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by akushla99

Ideas, notions, origami monsters get supernova-ed from the crushing...our stories fit, they were personal, accidental, misguided...that's easy to recognize in childish thought/action...


Childish thought/action overgrown.


akushla99
There are always the literalists (God bless 'em) - of course, only when it serves the internal logic, when the spaghetti junction turn-off procedures are more noticeable by thier conspicuousness...looks like panic, hunkering down...utilising one self-referential scripture to describe a wholly subjective and personal experience...oh, the cheeky rabbits! The experience of red exists because I can sense it - but then again, I may be hallucinating...lol..


The internal logic is what throws me, off the exit ramp right into an evangelicals tent, playing with snakes and singing hymns in tongue or as you say they go to the bunker straitaway and duck under tables filled with anything that references themselves as "humans trying to make sense of Gods world/word". I am reminded of the "self help section at Borders--1000s of books" explaining the human to itself. The experience of red cardinal disapears in a tree of green leaves; the red reflects the green and so it disapears, green perfect camoflauge for red.


akushla99
The Little Golden Book franchise is coming along quite nicely, reprints, edits and all...one would have thought there was only one company dealing in the story telling...apparently, there is no democracy in the heavens...'it's my way, or the highway'...funnily enough, as we have discussed on these very boards, this requires other locales to house the 'damned'...there is one of these also...surprise, surprise...basic child psychology...it would be laughable, if it wasn't so serious in the eyes of baked-on cyclops adherents?


Best seller ever. Someone has the franchise on Gods word, and who determines it? Id like to publish my own version of the Bible, and whos to stop me? Simon and Schuster? Knopf? I am wondering who has the corner on calendars, someone decides what day thursday Thanksgiving lands on--or the very strange one Easter. Sometimes its in March sometimes in April and depends upon lent. Democracy in the heavens what a concept, I thought it was all about power and blood lust. Those one eyed ones that lurk and prey upon the falabilies of children (and their parents how much stock to they own in Pharma Industies) ; or take/test the product lines on their own children, oh they only market and sell the products.


akushla99
Being 'used' as deception, would probably have been a better title, closer to the truth...but, there's no medals for the 'losers'...it's the victors who write history...and can rightly claim the literature (and its interpretation) as legitimisation...that's origami heaven...lol...


Big chance for rethinking of thread title missed should have been a second responder might have had time. No medals for losers, just a huge unwieldy blood soaked legacy left in his name. The victors write and profit from books (greatest story ever told I hear). If that was the intent all along, someone did some fine market research.
edit on 12-7-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
The simple fact is that Jesus IS God. We aren't worshiping a person instead of God, but God Incarnate, come to die for us, in payment for our sins. The deception is people not understanding that simple truth. It's common, so understandable how you could ask the question.


Jesus is God in the same way I am you are, everyone is, an expression of itself. He was in the 'business' of prostlitizing just as as you may be a lawyer/politican, lunchlady, or panhandler. Jesus never proclaimed himself god, just "aspect", and I dont have to read scripture to know this.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 



Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
The simple fact is that Jesus IS God. We aren't worshiping a person instead of God, but God Incarnate, come to die for us, in payment for our sins.


Paying who Satan or Himself? (Which wouldn't make sense).
Sin just means not doing whatever "God" tells you to do.
It is pretty psychotic to sacrifice yourself, to yourself because you didn't like how someone else was living their lives.


Heres the thing, he did this for all sins, does that mean only past sins of ones parents, ones being committed now by ourselves, including potencial sins of our children. Was it just a one time thing: I forgive Roman Overloards, draught, poverty, famine, the fact that the goats got out and ate the neighbors newly shirred wool, is this ongoing forgiveness, because if it is, I GET A FREE RIDE for any atrocities, murder or wanton behavior (all well described in the 10 Commandments) Id like. Does this act not nulify those commandments in TOTALITY?
Is that how any power religious or political justifiies its inhumanity to man (Jesus saves regardless of your intent, its on paper documented).
edit on 12-7-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Jusvistn
 


I was just pondering this scenario this morning, actually. I was thinking of it more as a what-if.

Jesus only fulfilled half of the Jewish prophecies then said "Oh, I'll get to the rest when I respawn" and people were all like "Sure thing, buddy! We'll keep eating your flesh and drinking your blood at communion!"

So if the real messiah were to return, he'd be trying convince people that he's really the first and that Jesus was just a wandering mystic. What's beautiful about this is that it's totally plausible (plot-wise) for either Jesus or the "Real Christ" to be lying.

As an outsider, I think I'd just grab some popcorn and watch the "Christ-Off Of All Eternity" (sunday, SUNday, SUNDAY).



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by chr0naut
 


Are you sure that you have read the Bible ? Or did you skim the bible ? Either way you have missed what Jesus is about just like so many other non believers who quote other people who do not follow Jesus ..


I have read the Bible cover to cover, in sequence, several times.

I also do study into specifics at least once a week.

My beliefs are, in Christian terms, quite moderate and traditional, but this does not mean I hold to the dispensationalist end times interpretation that many on ATS have misconstrued as being the only Christian view.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Jesus is real, He is God and man.

The world has the evidence of His Resurrection. The latest Italian study of the Shroud of Turin states, science cannot yet produce the UV rays that made the markings on the Shroud.

In an instant, isn't it beautiful, Our Lord went from being so tortured, not one part of His person free of cuts and bruises to His glorified body. Alleluia! Remember too...

The face cloth of Oviedo matches the blood type and markings on the Shroud.



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by vethumanbeing

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
The simple fact is that Jesus IS God. We aren't worshiping a person instead of God, but God Incarnate, come to die for us, in payment for our sins. The deception is people not understanding that simple truth. It's common, so understandable how you could ask the question.


Jesus is God in the same way I am you are, everyone is, an expression of itself. He was in the 'business' of prostlitizing just as as you may be a lawyer/politican, lunchlady, or panhandler. Jesus never proclaimed himself god, just "aspect", and I dont have to read scripture to know this.



You don't have to read scripture to know this? However if you had read scripture, just to find out, you would know you were not dealing with a lunch lady or panhandler. So yea you haven't read His history.

By the way if we are all God in the same way does that mean we are all.....whatever/



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Logarock
 

I do and have read it myself. Cant say the same for you.
Well in that case, I would recommend that you go to Romans 11 and read it again, with the thought in mind of testing what I said as being right or wrong, not just relying on the memory of reading it while under the influence of a cult preacher sermonizing on the greatness of a supposed Old Testament Israel.
edit on 12-7-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


And just what cult preacher would that be? Maybe the same one you listened to for years?



posted on Jul, 12 2013 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 

There is a penalty when we do wrong, both in the eyes of Man AND the eyes of God. For God, that penalty is death. A truly just God cannot simply pretend that sin didn't happen. Thus, a death is due.
That was the Medieval way of viewing things based on influences from the Roman Imperial justice system.
Even in the Old Testament law, there were refuge cities established for wanted criminals, and there was plain banishment.
Also in connection with the Day of Atonement, there was the scapegoat that took sin guilt away from the habitation of men.
The sort of thing that you seem to be supporting by this presentation of logic is the substitutionary penal atonement theory that was originally written about by Augustine, a trained polytheist "pagan" who later in life took on the Christian nomenclature.
According to the New Testament, God can forgive sins simply by forgetting them.
What this theory you are espousing does, essentially, in my opinion, is to superimpose an unnamed authority higher than God, that must be appeased in its demand for payment for sins, where God has no choice other than to offer his son in order to meet the payment due.
edit on 12-7-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


Save for the fact that in the OT law there were some conditions that no atonement prevision was made for. There was only refuge cites for certain cases but these cases had to find refuge because their was no atonement ritual. And even in many cases where atonement could be made one still had to pay or restitute.





new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join