common finti, your more than just a dude with viking blood, it all taces back somewhereof course it does, but that aint the same as it have to be the work or product of a deity though
Ignorance is found in those who doubt, deny, or hide the truth. But never those who seek it. For those who seek are no longer ignorant, but educated.ignorance is found in those who think they know the truth
Re: Sacrifice of Jesus
Originally posted by DarkCrawler
Was that really so bad? I would sacrifice myself too for all the people in the world if I would be alive after three days. I mean, yeah it was painful and he died, but still...
I have reason to believe that he did this to die for our sins,.JM 🙁
comparisson between osiris-dionyss and jesus christ.
here is info on osiris
his father was god and his mother a virgin
He is born in a cave/cowshed before 3 shepherds
he offers his followers the chance to be born again through baptism
he turns water into wine at a marriage ceremony
his followers awaited his return during the end of days
and remeber,the stories of osiris where written 5oo years before christ was even belived to have lived.
this is just a brief description of a few of the simularities between the two
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Its not a matter of believing in Christ - I believe Christ existed, because there are evidence that he has and hes a historical figure.The question you perhaps are asking is whether or not people believe he was divine and/or a prophet of god.
His divinity is questionable, but not his existence.
I also very much admire Jesus - he died a gruesome death for what he believed in and he never renounced it - determanation to be looked up to.
I admire and look up to Jesus - its certain number his ''followers'' that I do not look up to or admire.
another example of someone misinformed.
the only real history we have of jesus was written 50 years after he would have died in a passage full of inconsitancies.
Not even the romans,who kept careful records of everything,mention the crucifixtion or anything of christ.
some letters concering christ exist but have proven to be later additions by the church
Originally posted by gp christ loves
none of the gospels contradict each other and you have four so that they help proof each other of there validity.actually i have studied this one only about 5 of the major characters in the bible arent found in any other historical records. historians have found other records for all the kings mintioned all but 10 of the named people in the new testament and all but 20 in the old testament
the governments forced people to be part of certain religious groups not to belive in christ it is ones own choice wether or not they belive in that
and if there truly weren't consaquences for our thought we wouldn't ever feel guilty for the things that we sometimes think about. also if it was fully prooven that Christ was the savior and that there was a God then there would be no more need for faithdo all of you have to have signs for you to belive something. i mean some things just have to be taken by faith.
"none of the gospels contradict eachother"
okay here is the the genealogies presented in the gospel of matthew and luke.Both go into great pains to show jesus descended from the line of David both they both CONTRADICT eachother.
matthew / luke
jesus / jesus
joseph / joseph
jacob / heli
matthan / matthat
eleazar / levi
eliud / melchi
achim / jannai
zadok / joseph
azor / mattathiah
I could keep going but you get the picture from here.
according to matthew and mark,jesus was both thried and sentenced by the jewish priests of the sanhedrin.
luke has it that jesus was tried by the sanhedrin but not sentenced by them.Yet according to john jesus doesn't appear before them at all.
mark tells us the when some disciples found his empty tomb they merely saw a young man in a white robe(mark6v5).
luke,however,states that two men in brilliant clothes suddenly appeared by their side(luke24v4).
in mark and matthew the ressurected jesus appears to his other disicples in gailee but in luke has him appearing around jerusalem.
this is only a few inconsitancies.
but i'll let you look at these for now
he got those straight from the bible the difference is they aren't contradictions they are only differences and the names are only different translations not different meanings plus because of lukes statuse on not being of jewish background he would not have known about jesuses trial and would not have been at it like matthew and mark where
not all the names are different translations.
Maybe then i should talk about how each gospel has jesus's last words being different?
differences/contradictions same difference.Each gospel says something different.that just isn't a small,insignificent,differnece,that's a huge inconsistency within scrirpture.
Or maybe talk about how the gospels can't even decide whether the ressurection was phsical or spirtual.
Or maybe how the joshua ben Nun of exodus translates as jesus son of the fish.
Originally posted by mr.smiley
not all the names are different translations.
Maybe then i should talk about how each gospel has jesus's last words being different?
differences/contradictions same difference.Each gospel says something different.that just isn't a small,insignificent,differnece,that's a huge inconsistency within scrirpture.Or maybe talk about how the gospels can't even decide whether the ressurection was phsical or spirtual.
Or maybe how the joshua ben Nun of exodus translates as jesus son of the fish.
the only thing more disturbing than the gospels not agreeing on anything,is the fact that when you look through history,how much the christians borrowed from the pagans.
listen to this inscription from mithra.keep in mind mithra was around long before jesus was supposed to have lived.
He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood,so that he will be made one with me and i with him,the same shall not know salvation.
sound familar?
Heres what the Gospel of John says of jesus.
Unless you eat of the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood,you have not life in yourselves.Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood will live in me and i in him
I was also reading today on how the word mana has been used by shamans forever and that it means spiritual life...In the Bible it means bread from heaven...I think the whole story is a metaphor..
Also many of the feast days go pretty hand in and with the pagan 8 days of the year..spring and falls days...such a coincidence...hmmm
The Genealogy of Jesus according to Matthew and Luke
The Natural and Legal Father of Joseph
Heli (Gr. HELEI--Luke 3:23). In Luke he is said to be the father of Joseph, while in Matthew, Jacob was Joseph's father.
The most probable explanation of this seeming contradiction is afforded by having recourse to the levirate law among the Jews, which prescribes that when a man dies childless his widow "shall not marry to another; but his brother shall take her, and raise up seed for his brother" (Deut., xxv, 5).
If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband's brother shall go in to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her.
Deuteronomy 25:5, NKJV
The child, therefore, of the second marriage is legally the child of the first (Deut., xxv, 6). Heli having died childless, his widow became the wife of his brother Jacob, and Joseph was the offspring of the marriage, by nature the son of Jacob, but legally the son of Heli. It is likely that Matthew emphasized the natural, and Luke the legal descent.