Topic awaiting preservation: You do NOT know your fate! (Page 2 of 2)

`THE SHADOW KNOWS!

CBF what facts have archeologist found that jesus existed?

I heard that they did some kind of modeling in 3D app of jesus' face....but where did they get source from?

Ruski: I know that theres much better documented sources, but this was a quick one: clicky.

__________________
War is Peace,
Freedom is Slavery,
Ignorance is Strength.

IMO, the simple facts of the changes in the general view of people in that area at that time are close to enough to support the idea that Jesus existed as a person.

The impact that the man (or the story, should that be the case) had on the world is practically incomprehensible.

A paradigm shift, if ever there was one.

The idea that we could change from the jealousy and anger of god in the old testament to the love and forgiveness of the new testament is quite something...regardless of which side of the fence you're on religiously or philosophically.

It says nothing as to the divinity of the person, or of the existence of a god. But is points very definately to a person or group of people who were truly revolutionary in thought and action.

FWIW...

nicely stated DL. on an aside note i heard an interesting comment by someone asking that if jesus didn't rise from the dead, why didn't the romans simply produce the body and put the whole christianity thing to rest? the tomb was guarded after all, you'd have to assume that roman soldiers could take a couple apostles we can hypothesize either way, just food for thought.

to answer synax's question on how we know anything's real, is it possible this is all totally fabricated? sure, anything is possible. the thing is that i've seen in my life how real God is and that His relationship to me lines up with how its described in the bible. i've also seen and had friends experience things that convince me beyond a shadow of a doubt that God and spiritual warfare are very real. because of this i do believe that the bible is entirely accurate. that doesn't mean there aren't things that i don't understand or agree with, but those things rarely (if ever) have an impact on my daily life and relationship with God, they're primarily historical. but to each their own.


KAIROSinteractive

maybe the tomb and all that stuff never happened, this is exactly what aposltes could have made up....

after all Paul admited he never met the christ in person...

CBF I know Jesus existed, by historic documents, but they always end with him being crusified...

what I am looking for is what archiologist found...beside historic documents on christ...not that he jusr existed, but what he really was?

If you can provide scientific explanation, that would be helpful

ruski, if it hadn't happened then (or at least something hadn't happened) then the romans would've simply nipped the whole christianity thing in the bud and ended it right there. as DL so eleoquently put, SOMETHING happened that caused a huge shift in thinking and started a movement the eventually affected the entire world. you're also assuming that there were only 12 people with any firsthand knowledge of christ. thousands upon thousands of people saw him preach and teach and were converted to following "the way" (as it was referred to in the early church). this wasn't just started because of what twelve guys wrote.

as far as biblical history being true, check out a very cool show i saw on the discovery channel last night called "ancient evidence". it examines different biblical events and fins historical evidence for or against those occurences, really interesting stuff.

chris


KAIROSinteractive

Not only were there thousands that were influenced by His preachings before the crucifixion but the NT accounts tell us that a few hundred followers saw Him alive *after* the crucifixion.

I like what you said, DL. At this point in time with what we know now, it is a diffucult position to take when one doubts the existence of the *man* Jesus Christ. His divinity and the resurrection is a different matter and understandably so. While I believe there is significant reasons to believe the latter, there are even more for believing the former.

. . : slicePuzzle

Fig 12 guys didnt write anything...they just kept preaching.

They didnt know how to write...

I mean its pretty clear how can it have an affect on people....you go to a depressed person and say...Hey, do this and you will have Immortal life! YAY

cmon, since you got nothing else to do why wouldnt you just do it? So people kept passing it on and on...I dont understand thought why would romans want to end it?

I mean the Oilate himself didnt even want to do anything with jesus, jews are the ones wanted him dead....well of course it makes sense, one of the jews just one day starts walking and telling....I am messiah, then I am GOD, Me and GOD are one! if you were jew at that time, you would be what the F@$% is this guy thinking?

as for ressurection, dont believe it....


I am sure noah existed, and so did moses...but the whole ideas? 9 centuries of life? split the sea? It's just like too questionable, how come we dont see anymore of this fantasy miracles?

I compare them to resurection....

I know how people just dont want to die, and hide from truth, they just want to live forever! " because afterall, cmon! I have archived so much! am I just gonna die?
I want eternal life for for gods sake!"

Ruski, why do you keep saying they didn't know how to write? They most certainly did know how to write. Who do you think wrote most of the New Testament? The majority of it was written in their lifetimes.

As to why we don't see large miracles now, well, the reason probably has something to do with the shift in attitude between the Old and New Testaments, The Old Testament had lots of large, 'fearful' miracles, like a column of fire, or god englufing thing, or smiting this, or this, or that. The New Testament miracles are mostly small-scale. Ressurect Lazerus, turn some water into wine, create some fish etcetera. It looks like God has become less and less evident as time has progressed, almost like: 'In the beginning' he needed to to create a following, but as world spread, he didn't nead to. Of course, when Jesus comes down, he can do some miracles. It really looks like the only point is to wow some people and provide some help for some blind people etcetera.

Well, I'm sleep deprived, and I don't even think I make sense to myself, so If I make tons of errors and am completely incoherant, forgive me.

[This message has been edited by counterfeitbacon (edited 10-17-2003).]

[This message has been edited by counterfeitbacon (edited 10-17-2003).]

Because they were fishermen...

uneducated peasants, but who wrote it? I dunno....My guess they simply preached it, but didnt record anything, some people perhaps that fallowed their preaching took notes.

edit: I will always forgive you CBF

in my oppinion, becouse miracles are nothing supernatural at all, but rather natural...as for the sea split and such , thats just a tale =)



[This message has been edited by Ruski (edited 10-17-2003).]

From here

__________________
War is Peace,
Freedom is Slavery,
Ignorance is Strength.

ruski, please have SOME idea of what you're talking about before you write things. among the occupations of the apostles and others who followed and wrote about christ were fishermen, a tax collector, a doctor (luke), and a biblical scholar (paul).

chris


KAIROSinteractive

I do not post here usually and I won't say much.

Ruski: Whether or not the authors of the books of the New Testament were literate is irrelevent. At the end of the letter to the Romans, the scribe who was doing the actual writing for Paul greets the church there.

Romans 16:22 I, Tertius, who write this letter, greet you in the Lord.

Also, your thoughts about why Jesus's message was accepted by people doesn't make much sense.

quote:

---

I know how people just dont want to die, and hide from truth, they just want to live forever! " because afterall, cmon! I have archived so much! am I just gonna die?
I want eternal life for for gods sake!"

---

You seem to think that Jesus preached that salvation is an extension of this life; that our acheivements carry over. However, we are told repeatedly:

Matthew 19:30 But many who are first will be last; and the last, first.

Those who seek glory in this life and are not humble are reaping their rewards NOW and will not reap them later. The first half of Matthew 6 is devoted to this principle. Also, faithful Christians are PROMISED that they will be persecuted for their beliefs.

John 15:18-20 (Jesus speaking to the Apostles)"If he world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, 'A slave is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they kept My word, they will keep yours also.

Fig: If by Paul you mean the author of the majority of the letters to the churches (epistles) then I am afraid you are mistaken about his profession.

Acts 18:3 (speaking of Paul) and because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them and they were working, for by trade they were tent-makers.

Paul was a tent-maker by trade and when he needed a break from his preaching he returned to his trade. As there was no book called "The Bible" at this time he could not have been a "Biblical Scholar." He WAS however an expert on the old law. Before his conversion he was considered a "Jew among Jews." (Galatians 1:14 - The wording is actually a bit different than that.)

As for the point of this topic, well Paul, who considered himself the worst sinner on Earth,

1 Timothy 1:15It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all.

. . . still made this statement near the end of his life:

2 Timothy 4:7,8 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing.

Christians are perfectly justified in their confidence about salvation. I would, in fact, argue that you MUST be confident in your salvation, and that is not to say perfection, if you claim to have faith.

I encourage you to read the entire passages that these verses come from to find for yourself the full context of the quotes and to make sure that I am not taking them out of that contex.

Edit: Woa! more than I was intending.
Edit2: The actual "jew among jews" verse is Philippians 3:5 and is worded in the NAS version "a Hebrew of Hebrews."


It's pronounced "Spikes!"

[This message has been edited by SPyX (edited 10-17-2003).]

[This message has been edited by SPyX (edited 10-17-2003).]

CFB: Were you ever corrected about your "why we worship on sunday" statement?

No I wasn't, but I'd be glad to be,

__________________
War is Peace,
Freedom is Slavery,
Ignorance is Strength.

Good info there, Spyx. Paul was: Talmudic student. Pharisee. Tent-maker by trade.

I did answer CFB about worshipping on the first day of the week above.
[edit]I must have buried it too deep with my other replies... here it is again: "CFB, we have been worshipping on the first day of the week almost from the beginning. You will recall that Christ rose on Sunday and the early Xians gathered on that day in honor of that. "

[This message has been edited by Bugimus (edited 10-17-2003).]

Ahh yes, now I see it. Thanks, I have a tendancy to start skimming through stuff without realizing I'm doing it. And I realize why the worship happens every 7 days, but why sunday?

[This message has been edited by counterfeitbacon (edited 10-17-2003).]

Worshiping on the first day of the week is based on sound biblical principle, as should be all beliefs that Christians hold. I will assume, for this explanation, that the three bases of biblical authority (direct command, approved example, and necessary inference) are accepted.

I will START this time by encouraging everyone to read the entire texts that I will be quoting from to more fully understand the context and to make sure that I am not taking the verses out of those contexts.

First, we are commanded to take an offering:

1 Corinthians 16:1,2 Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I directed the churches of Galatia, so do you also. On the first day of every week each one of you is to put aside and save, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come. (Direct command)

Then we are commanded to take what is now known as "The Lord's Supper":

1 Corinthians 11:23-26 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me." 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes. (Direct Command)

Next, we have this passage:

Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight.

Here we have several things going on.
1. We have an approved example of Paul and the church at Troas coming together on the first day of the week for the purpose of breaking bread.
2. Next we infer that "breaking bread" in this case means the same as it does in the first passage and does not refer to a common meal. We infer this because A. Paul's travel plans included provision for him to be there for this meal, B. He was there for a long time - past midnight speaking to the church, and C. returning to 1 Corinthians 11, because of Paul's condemnation of the church coming together mainly to eat a common meal together:

1 Corinthians 11:17-22 17 But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it. 19 For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you. 20 Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper, 21 for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall praise you? In this I will not praise you.

So, we have authority and responsibility from the Bible to meet on "the first day of the week," which for us is Sunday, to take the Lord's Supper and to take a collection.

Now, we also have commands to sing, to pray, to preach, to study, and to be responsible for the members of our congregation. I'll skip those verses for now unless asked to show them. These we practice on Sunday because we are already together and these are a logical extention of this gathering. Practicing them on Sunday is a matter of convenience AND desire. This is not to lessen the importance of these aspects of worship at all, it is simply that the Lord Supper and collection are the only things we have biblical command to do ONLY on Sunday. And Lord Supper is commanded for EVERY Sunday.

I hope I've been clear in this. I had to rewrite the whole thing because of the stupid back button.

Of course, I must point out at this time, for the record, that any of the conclusions you draw from those sources, spyx, are pure conjecture as there is no real way to verify or even assume the truth of any statements of Jesus' divinity.

I understand that you may take the bible at face value, but you need to understand that you can't make anyone else beleive it by simply quoting it.

In response to the statement about why there aren't any miricles anymore... I seem to remember reading a passage in one bible that stated that God "removed his hand from the world". That he basically regretted what his interference had caused and vowed not to interfere anymore. I always thought that it was in/around/near the story of the flood but I'venever been able to find it. Does anyone have any idea where that passage can be found? I don't know which bible (NIV, KJ, or other) version it was that I read it in but the bible I read most is 150 years old. I've read probably 5 different renditions so the 5 most common might be the best place to look.

The passage stuck in my mind because I found it odd that an omnicient being would be capable of feeling regret when they would have had to have known what was happening. They would have seen the possible courses that could be taken and not taken the one that would have made them feel regretful. Hopefully someone can locate that passage for me. I'll conitnue looking but I haven't had any luck so far.

Could it have been this reference?

quote:

---

And God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem. But as the angel was doing so, the LORD saw it and was grieved because of the calamity and said to the angel who was destroying the people, "Enough! Withdraw your hand." The angel of the LORD was then standing at the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite.

Entire chapter found here: 1 Chronicles 21

---

That would be the one. A little skewed in my memory but it still carries the weight of my facination with it. What do you guys feel is the character of God's omniciense? I think Bug's has touched on this before. Is it an all encompassing view of possibility/probability? Or is it actually knowing what is to come? In either case this story seems to either put God into a less welcoming light or point out that he doesn't know what is coming (Even if it isn't taken literally). Also - is God an emotional being and directly influencing things on earth or a being devoid of emotion and neutral in affecting our lives actively. Or any mixture of those I suppose.

quote:

---

The passage stuck in my mind because I found it odd that an omnicient being would be capable of feeling regret when they would have had to have known what was happening. They would have seen the possible courses that could be taken and not taken the one that would have made them feel regretful. Hopefully someone can locate that passage for me. I'll conitnue looking but I haven't had any luck so far.

---

Today is a Friday. That means that I had a math test, since they occur every Friday. I didn't know the material, and I knew that I didn't know the material. I also knew that I'd fail the math test. I failed the math test, and when it was graded (in class), I felt dissapointed with myself.

So you chose to fail the test then? By knowing that there is a test every Friday and not making point of knowing the material you CHOSE to fail the test.

The question is... did you know you would be disappointed with that choice? If so, Why on earth did you make it?

In my mind an omnicient being would know what said course of action would result in and how they felt about those results. What that passage says to me is that God did something he knew to be too much, knowingly and willingly allowing people to be slain when there would be no need for it. This assumes His omnicience. If he didn't know what was to come, I have a hard time seeing him as omnicient. Not only not omnicient, but fallible.

i'm sure the following is in the b-i-b-l-e, though they're not exactly quotes:

God is a jealous god
the wrath of God
God was greived
God was sorry
Jesus wept. (shortest verse in the Bible)
jesus was tempted in all points, even as we are (makes you wonder about sex, drugs, and rock and roll), yet without sin.

my point - i think a lot of people (bible thumpers) need to rethink their definition of

S-I-N

i know without a doubt, that if i live, i'm going to get old. and unless there's a BIG scientific breakthrough, or something supernatural happens, i'm going to physically DIE.
the thing is - i KNOW from personal experience that the supernatural is real. and that's what i'm counting on. besides, if i knew that i knew my fate (which i do, by the by) and i could explain it to you, it would sound to most people like a bunch of silliness. which brings me to something else from the B-I-B-L-E; God has chosen the foolish (silly) things of this world to confound the wise. i see this happening every day. if you look, i'm certain you do to.

and one last sorta quote - they wouldn't believe even if one did rise from the grave.

~jeremiah was a bullfrog~