Does Jesus save because he was born or because his blood was spilt? In the bible Jesus indicates he is the saviour while still alive, before the crucifiction:

John 14
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

And yet we are constantly told Jesus died for our sins. For example church on my street has the banner "Body-piercing saved us all" (b-b-tsss). So which is it - his birth or his death? For example, if someone died, say, 3 months before Jesus' death could he be saved by Jesus or only Old Testament methods?

The question is, did Jesus die on the cross for all the life in the universe which any respectable person knows it out there, or did he just die for humanity. When you think about it like that, all the rest seems so small and unimportant.

But on a human scale, Jesus' death is the most important event in history, if it happened or not.

I think the idea might come from the old Jewish custom of sacrificing animals to seek forgiveness of one's sins. The sacrifice of the son of God would be the ultimate sacrifice, one that could cleanse all of humanity of its sins. It would therefore be the death of Jesus that saves people, and the revelation of that would be beginning of the new covenant with God. Also, if someone died before Jesus's death he could be saved by Old Testament methods since it was before the new covenant was established.

And for the record, I don't actually believe in what I just wrote about.

Does Jesus save because he was born or because his blood was spilt? In the bible Jesus indicates he is the saviour while still alive, before the crucifiction:

John 14
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

And yet we are constantly told Jesus died for our sins. For example church on my street has the banner "Body-piercing saved us all" (b-b-tsss). So which is it - his birth or his death? For example, if someone died, say, 3 months before Jesus' death could he be saved by Jesus or only Old Testament methods?

Well, according to the bible Jesus saved people who understood his message before he went to the cross.
For instance the lady at the well.

9The Samaritan woman said to him, "You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?" (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.[a])

10Jesus answered her, "If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water."

11"Sir," the woman said, "you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? 12Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his flocks and herds?"

13Jesus answered, "Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life."

15The woman said to him, "Sir, give me this water so that I won't get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water."

16He told her, "Go, call your husband and come back."

17"I have no husband," she replied.

Jesus said to her, "You are right when you say you have no husband. 18The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true."

19"Sir," the woman said, "I can see that you are a prophet. 20Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem."

21Jesus declared, "Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."

25The woman said, "I know that Messiah" (called Christ) "is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us."

26Then Jesus declared, "I who speak to you am he."



Book of John.

Does Jesus save because he was born or because his blood was spilt? In the bible Jesus indicates he is the saviour while still alive, before the crucifiction:

John 14
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

And yet we are constantly told Jesus died for our sins. For example church on my street has the banner "Body-piercing saved us all" (b-b-tsss). So which is it - his birth or his death? For example, if someone died, say, 3 months before Jesus' death could he be saved by Jesus or only Old Testament methods?
I think it might be a "package deal". You have to believe Christ is the Son of God and that he died for your sins and that he resurrected. At least I think that is what I was taught. From what he said along the way, just coming to earth and dying did nothing unless you believe he is "the way" and "light of the world". God's word made flesh...which I think is in the OT somewhere about "word becoming flesh".

Just my take.

Oh, and as an aside...the way the Christians have it set up... you can't go to heaven except through Christ....then they release the Jews from that because the Jews look for the coming of Christ whilst the Christians look for the "second coming". Therefore when Christ returns he will be recognized by Christians and Jews alike. Voila both go to heaven.

Just my take again and something I thought up while in parochial school.

Did Jesus or Jesus' death save us?
No.

There is exponentially more suffering inflicted on mankind in the Common Era (Anno Domine). These days we'd need a conveyor belt of messiahs to cleanse our sins since the last Messianic figure appeared. :D

Does Jesus save because he was born or because his blood was spilt? In the bible Jesus indicates he is the saviour while still alive, before the crucifiction:

John 14
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

And yet we are constantly told Jesus died for our sins. For example church on my street has the banner "Body-piercing saved us all" (b-b-tsss). So which is it - his birth or his death? For example, if someone died, say, 3 months before Jesus' death could he be saved by Jesus or only Old Testament methods?

Neither. It is his resurrection that saves us. The fact that Jesus was born in and of itself means little. The fact that he died, while more important than his birth means more but if he had died and stayed dead it would have been a useless death. The fact that he was born, lived a perfect life, took on our sins and died to expiate them and then ROSE FROM THE DEAD AND ASCENDED TO HEAVEN is of utmost importance.

That is why Easter is a much more important holiday in the Christian calendar than Christmas.

Thanks for the responses, all. I wasn't sure if this was a stupid question and there is one clear answer but it seems there is a diverse spectrum of opinion. And Frogger- you have introduced a third, reasonable sounding scenario I hadn't even considered.

It seems to me there is support for all three positions: Jesus does say he is the way while still alive; the church sign on my road points to the crucifiction as key; and Frogger points to the resurrection as the defining event.

Hmmm. Oh well, there's no single answer, I guess that's my conclusion for now.

Hmmm. Oh well, there's no single answer, I guess that's my conclusion for now.
Having attended church since the week of my birth and having a father with a degree in theology and a library on Christ, I'd have to say Frogger is the most correct.

His birth was a beacon to the world, His crucifixion was the progression and sign of rebirth. The ascension into Heaven is the more important part, because the process is over and He had fully cleansed Man's Sin by that time.

I agree with Frogger and Evak, while there are several stories that would seem to have different themes behind them in the bible about Jesus. The main theme is his resurrection.

I still say it is a package deal...if you don't accept him as the son of God then you are toast... the trinity is an intricate part of Christianity.

I still say it is a package deal...if you don't accept him as the son of God then you are toast... the trinity is an intricate part of Christianity.

Yes, thats the reason he was put on the cross and resurrected. Because he is the son of God.

I still say it is a package deal...Yes that's tempting - he couldn't have been resurrected if not crucified, and he couldn't have been crucified if not born - so why try and separate it out?

The problem with that though is it all seems so fatalistic. When Jesus arrived on Earth was there never any hope that everyone might love him and not presecute him? And what would have happened if he had been accepted - would we will still need Jesus as a saviour even without his death and rebirth?

Or perhaps that it would all end in tragedy was planned and known by him upstairs already and there was never any hope.

Yes, thats the reason he was put on the cross and resurrected. Because he is the son of God.
He was put to death because he was messing up the whole political structure not merely because he said he was the Son of God.

Yes that's tempting - he couldn't have been resurrected if not crucified, and he couldn't have been crucified if not born - so why try and separate it out?

The problem with that though is it all seems so fatalistic. When Jesus arrived on Earth was there never any hope that everyone might love him and not presecute him? And what would have happened if he had been accepted - would we will still need Jesus as a saviour even without his death and rebirth?

Or perhaps that it would all end in tragedy was planned and known by him upstairs already and there was never any hope.

So basically the question is, Why did Jesus even have to exist?

He was put to death because he was messing up the whole political structure not merely because he said he was the Son of God.

Well, yes. But I think Blob is asking what religious significance his death and resurrection had to Christianity?

No.

There is exponentially more suffering inflicted on mankind in the Common Era (Anno Domine). These days we'd need a conveyor belt of messiahs to cleanse our sins since the last Messianic figure appeared. :D


I would have to disagree with this statement. His death and resurrection was the focus of salvation.

Yes that's tempting - he couldn't have been resurrected if not crucified, and he couldn't have been crucified if not born - so why try and separate it out?

The problem with that though is it all seems so fatalistic. When Jesus arrived on Earth was there never any hope that everyone might love him and not presecute him? And what would have happened if he had been accepted - would we will still need Jesus as a saviour even without his death and rebirth?

Or perhaps that it would all end in tragedy was planned and known by him upstairs already and there was never any hope.

Yeah the fatalistic thing always crops up with any kind of Christian belief starting right with the Garden of Eden and the whole concept of Original Sin. And that was what we supposedly needed to be saved from "original sin" which stained our soul and was passed on down. Thus we need a saviour. And thus begins the whole debate about original sin and the belief in the immaculate conception of Christ etc. and thus man's different beliefs held in faith within the different sects of Christianity itself.

Fun to debate though.

Or... was Jesus just a regular person who a lot of people followed.

So basically the question is, Why did Jesus even have to exist?Hmmm... no. Sorry, lol.

More this: Assuming Jesus was who Christians say he was, what is the mechnaism for being the saviour?

I can think of the following options:
- cos he was born
- cos he was crucified
- cos he was resurrected
- stop thinking and just believe!

Hmmm... no. Sorry, lol.

More this: Assuming Jesus was who Christians say he was, what is the mechnaism for being the saviour?

I can think of the following options:
- cos he was born
- cos he was crucified
- cos he was resurrected
- stop thinking and just believe!

You'll have to forgive me Blob, Im still a little confused.
Are you asking, what caused the need for a saviour?
Or
What points to Jesus being the saviour?

Don't worry I'm confusing myself too.

Not what, who or why, but when. When did things change from OT rule to NT rule? On which day, precisely?

No reason for all this by the way. Just came up in conversation the other day and there were no Christians around to ask (this is Britain afterall... ;) ).

It seems to me there is support for all three positions: Jesus does say he is the way while still alive; the church sign on my road points to the crucifiction as key; and Frogger points to the resurrection as the defining event.

Of course there are three different positions supported.

As it is with virtually everything else in that compendium of fables and lies known as the "Bible", contradictions, ambiguities and absurd myths are the order of the day.

"Well, ya see, they nailed this guy to a piece of wood and killed him 20 centuries ago, so that means that all homo sapiens were granted immortality!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It all makes SUCH perfect sense. [/sarcasm] LOLOL.

Don't worry I'm confusing myself too.

Not what, who or why, but when. When did things change from OT rule to NT rule? On which day, precisely?

No reason for all this by the way. Just came up in conversation the other day and there were no Christians around to ask (this is Britain afterall... ;) ).

Oh!..

When Mary Magdalene first seen him after the resurrection.

Hmmmm. So what do you make of John 14:6?

Hmmmm. So what do you make of John 14:6?

6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

He is saying he is the only way to be forgiven of your sins.

Or perhaps Jesus is a bodyguard for God, and you have to kill His Son to gain access to meet Him. Pontius Pilate was plotting all along!

Jesus took on our sins and died for us and was resurrected because without that the only way to get to heaven would be by fullfilling the Law of the Old
Testament. Since none of us, other than Jesus is perfect enough to obey every single part of the Law none of us would get to heaven.

Jesus lived a perfect life and was without sin. He fullfilled all the requirements of the Law. Had he chosen he could have gone to heaven without going through the agony of crucifixion. Instead he took on our sin so that we no longer had to fullfill every single requirement of the Law, something impossible to do.

By his life, death and resurrection Jesus paid the price for us.

Jesus lived a perfect life and was without sin. He fullfilled all the requirements of the Law. Had he chosen he could have gone to heaven without going through the agony of cruxifiction. Instead he took on our sin so that we no longer had to fullfill every single requirement of the Law, something impossible to do. By his life, death and resurrection Jesus paid the price for us.

Yeah, that's a pretty good one.

I like another one even better.

It's about a God man, born of a virgin mother, in a stable. He traveled about with his followers, preaching and performing miracles, including turning water into wine. Eventually, he incured the wrath of the religious authorities, who are appalled that he refered to himself as the son of God. He allowed himself to be arrested and tried for blasphemy- a willing self-sacrifice. He was found guilty and executed, only to rise from the grave three days later, where the women weeping at his tomb did not recognize him until he assumed his divine form.

That was the vine-God Dionysus, and he was worshipped hundreds of years before the Jesus myth was ever hatched.

But hey!.....this "Jesus" chap is the ONLY "real" true god, and any similarities he shares with prior gods, such as Dionysus, or Osiris, or Horus, or Mithra, are all 100% coincidental!

Right?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight .

6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

He is saying he is the only way to be forgiven of your sins.Yes but what about the "when" thing? It seems here Jesus is announcing he is the saviour while still alive and before the crucifiction; but meanwhile you, Frogger and Evakian all say that the resurrection was the key moment.

The similarities between Jesus and the various Greek mystery cults points up that Christianity originated as a Greek mystery cult. After all, the entire NT was written in Greek, with only a few Aramaicisms in it.

The difference was that this group of Greek mystery cultists latched onto the Isaiah promise of a Messiah ("of the branch of Jesse" became "Jesus of Nazareth"). This may be because they orignated in the Hellenic communities of Palestine, or maybe because they originated in close contact with the Diaspora.

Still, that does not, to my way of thinking, undermine Christianity (nor any of the other mystery cults) at all. Today's religions are for today's people, and their pasts are only of historical, not religious, impostance.

Welcome to allforums Thislin...interesting post.

Yes but what about the "when" thing? It seems here Jesus is announcing he is the saviour while still alive and before the crucifiction; but meanwhile you, Frogger and Evakian all say that the resurrection was the key moment.


In the moment Jesus was simply letting people know. Most of the time he would add something to the effect of, soon there will be a new way. Like he did with the lady by the well. He told her he could give her the water of life, that things will change shortly so that Jews arent the only ones to receive it.

While Jesus was alive he did have to show people he was the way to salvation, so that would put him in a spot to save people during his life. That didnt mean that the NT was in effect yet, because Jesus hadnt gone to the cross.

I'm sure Frogger could make a statement that might help.

Considering that scrifice means to give something up that has great value, it would be suffice to say that jesus didn't sacrifice his life because he didn't value this life as much as he valued the life he would have in heaven. Also since christians believe that Jesus was God, and since God is ever lasting then Jesus didn't die. So Either Jesus was fooling people or the Church is a lie.

Also since christians believe that Jesus was God, and since God is ever lasting then Jesus didn't die. So Either Jesus was fooling people or the Church is a lie.

THAT made me laugh out loud! And welcome to the site legaljones.

Religious belief is not based on such superficial, literal, thinking. As long as one's mind never probes with any depth, I suppose your argument has its appeal.

The Jesus story evolved in an atmosphere of magical thinking, where sacrifice was seen to have influence on the gods.

Mankind is in a different mental framework now and has less trust in magic (mainly because science is easily seen to be more effective). Therefore the story of the sacrifice, on the surface, seems absurd.

But the myth has a deeper meaning that all can appreciate--the idea of God's love being so great that He endures this to save us. As with many myths, even though the details seem absurd, the message has great appeal and value.

For this reason, I understand why those who value the history and traditions of Christianity can remain Christians, even though they now understand the stories of Christianity to be myths.

Yeah, that's a pretty good one.

I like another one even better.

It's about a God man, born of a virgin mother, in a stable. He traveled about with his followers, preaching and performing miracles, including turning water into wine. Eventually, he incured the wrath of the religious authorities, who are appalled that he refered to himself as the son of God. He allowed himself to be arrested and tried for blasphemy- a willing self-sacrifice. He was found guilty and executed, only to rise from the grave three days later, where the women weeping at his tomb did not recognize him until he assumed his divine form.

That was the vine-God Dionysus, and he was worshipped hundreds of years before the Jesus myth was ever hatched.

But hey!.....this "Jesus" chap is the ONLY "real" true god, and any similarities he shares with prior gods, such as Dionysus, or Osiris, or Horus, or Mithra, are all 100% coincidental!

Right?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight .


Your comparison would be more interesting if it was at all true, rather than pure b.s., Freethinker.

Dionysis was the son of Zeus and a mortal woman according to legend but that is where any similarity between his story and that of Jesus ends. Dionysis was raised by nymphs and taught man how to ferment wine from grapes. That is basically it for Dionysis.

To have to probe a system of thought with depth in order to even be able to appreciate it?

Sounds to me like the same sort of brainwashing that takes place at countless martial arts clubs across the country. They insist that discipline and unquestioning obedience to the school and it's customs is absolutely necessary to the acquisition of their "deadly" martial arts, when it's really just pulling the wool over your eyes and scamming money out of you for no real benefit.

If you wanted to think deep thoughts, why does one need a religion to do so? Does one really need a system for probing the deep questions of life? Anthropology cannot work just as well?

Your comparison would be more interesting if it was at all true, rather than pure b.s., Freethinker.

Dionysis was the son of Zeus and a mortal woman according to legend but that is where any similarity between his story and that of Jesus ends. Dionysis was raised by nymphs and taught man how to ferment wine from grapes. That is basically it for Dionysis.
Hah. The Greek myths are noticeably light on information concerning Dionysus, for a very good reason. He wasn't originally a Greek God, and he was only fitted into the classical (read: revisionist) pantheon later. Dionysus is much, much older than the ancient Greek cults.

The Jesus story evolved in an atmosphere of magical thinking, where sacrifice was seen to have influence on the gods.

Mankind is in a different mental framework now and has less trust in magic (mainly because science is easily seen to be more effective). Therefore the story of the sacrifice, on the surface, seems absurd.

I agree and I wish more people, especially Christians, understood the context in which the religion arose. Christianity was not developped in a manner exclusive of Greek mythology, various philosophies, and Jewish traditions. Furthermore, it originated in an area of the world that had seen centuries of volatility through empire building and collapse (Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, and eventually the Roman Empire into which Jesus was born). Not surprisingly, in that context of volatility people sought answers to philosophical questions.

Yes, there can be clear parallels made between Dionysus and Jesus. They're both dying and rising gods. They both have an association with wine (Dionysus as god of wine, Jesus and the Eucharist). And Dionysus is far from the only figure that shares similarities with Jesus. There are a variety of recurring themes and characteristics that can be seen in the story of Jesus and various Hebrew Bible figures and Greek mythology.

But I don't understand how, by pointing these things out, cynics think they are 'debunking' Christianity. So what if it is not all literally true? Some people seem to think that if something is not completely true (and by "true" I mean in the sense of historical fact) then it is meaningless. In contrast, I personally think that recognizing that the Bible isn't a history book and that Christianity did not originate in a vacuum actually makes it all the more interesting and meaningful.

I honestly think that people who refuse to see any redeeming value in religions (specifically when they take this position on behalf of all humanity) are just as bad as people who think the world was literally created in 6 days. Either way, they are missing the point.

The Greek myths are noticeably light on information concerning Dionysus, for a very good reason. He wasn't originally a Greek God, and he was only fitted into the classical (read: revisionist) pantheon later. Dionysus is much, much older than the ancient Greek cults.

I am genuinely interested in this. The Greeks did absorb the gods of other cultures into their pantheon as they spread their empire. However, it has always been my understanding that Dionysus was originally a Greek myth that was later appropriated by the Romans. So, out of pure curiousity, I was wondering whether you know which culture Dionysus originated with?

P.S. This is freakishly long. :@@:

"I honestly think that people who refuse to see any redeeming value in religions (specifically when they take this position on behalf of all humanity) are just as bad as people who think the world was literally created in 6 days. Either way, they are missing the point." --Esoterica

The literalists (both the religious types and their co-thinkers, many atheists) have a notion of "Truth," everyone who does not adopt their particular flavor of the month being either a heretic or stupid.

However, it has always been my understanding that Dionysus was originally a Greek myth that was later appropriated by the Romans. So, out of pure curiousity, I was wondering whether you know which culture Dionysus originated with?
Wikipedia has Dionysus listed as a Thracian god on their website, but to be honest with you, I don't really know. Religions that old are hard to pin down to one specific area.

When I used to be a new-agist, I had a High Priest who was quite knowledgeable about the old cults, he could have told me a lot more about Dionysus than is easily found on the web. But really, all of these gods are just rehashes of older deities that share the same stories and the same myths well back into the times before writing.

The literalists (both the religious types and their co-thinkers, many atheists) have a notion of "Truth," everyone who does not adopt their particular flavor of the month being either a heretic or stupid.
Truth itself has a few characteristics. I don't have the time to go deep into this, but the reasons stem from the way the human brain work. Don't ask me for sources, cause I'm pulling it out of my ass.

Truth is never uplifting, positive, happy, or anything like that. The universe does not care to help anyone. Truth is always slightly jarring, but not overly so. Truth is ego-deflating and simple. The truth is the simplest thing you could find. You cannot make a buck from truth, because people are forever running away from it to chase fiction. Truth is always negative. It's always unassuming, the first thing you find, but the last thing you believe, because you were always looking elsewhere. The words themselves do not please you, for their negativity, but after awhile, you feel better anyway, because you're not focused on chasing fruitless things anymore.

You make "truth" seem like something terrible: the fact is it tends to be neutral. As you say, the universe doesn't exist for our benefit, but it is not particularly out to get us either.

This is beside the point. The "Truth" (often, as I put it here, with a capital "T") is something different from what we might see as objective reality.

This "Truth" is dogma. It is your dogma that religions are superstitious claptrap; it is the socialists' dogma that corporations are exploitive monsters and the capitalists dogma that markets are the only solution to everything.

The problem is not that you are brave and think your teaching braver than that of others, but that you are dogmatic, and think your truth better than the truth of everyone else. This is especially bad because from where I sit you seem so lacking in depth.

If we all formed our views in a world of complete information and we had no biases and presuppositions, then truth and "Truth" would be the same. However, this is not the case.

The problem is not that you are brave and think your teaching braver than that of others, but that you are dogmatic, and think your truth better than the truth of everyone else. This is especially bad because from where I sit you seem so lacking in depth.
Notice I did not tell you *what* the truth is, I just told you how it, on the whole, tends to affect the consciousness, to give you some clues on recognizing it when you see it. And still you think I am being dogmatic and lacking in depth.

The problem, (here, our misunderstandings) stem not from my own opinions, (after all, we are all entitled to them) but from where you are indeed sitting, where it becomes next to impossible to truly judge another person's motive.

The similarities between Jesus and the various Greek mystery cults points up that Christianity originated as a Greek mystery cult......Still, that does not, to my way of thinking, undermine Christianity (nor any of the other mystery cults) at all.

I cannot see how any rational person takes that view. To me the fact that the Jesus myth was so obviously and clearly based upon various prior god-man, "bringer of light", sun god myths completely invalidates Christianity's claim of being THE one unique god in the entire universe.

Think of this;

The position of Christianity is that **Jesus is the one true god. He is the only god to have ever actually existed. All other gods are fabrications**.

How can it be that --if Jesus is unique, if Jesus in the only god to have ever exosted, that he has such a huge number of similarites to other previous gods that --from Christianity's position-- were entirely fabricated.........?!?!?

Do you see what I'm saying?...do you see the logical paradox??

IF what Christianity is telling us is true; if Jesus is the one true god.....IF He is the only god to have ever actually existed....IF all other gods are fabrications, then every aspect of Jesus ---the virgin birth, the travelling about with followers, the performing miracles, the arrest and trial for blasphemy, the willing self-sacrifice, the rising from the grave three days later, the fact of being called the "bringer of light", the fact of being called the "son of man"......ALL of those things, from the Christian perspective, had to be purely coincidental, since, from the Christian perspective, they had never happened before, because all prior gods were false and thus nonexistant.

BUT....there is one other possible explanation; the one that makes perfect sense, logically. That the Jesus myth was created by drawing upon the various attibutes of gods that were worshipped a hundred or five hundred years earlier.

Ergo, Jesus was just as much of a fabrication as those gods that the Christians wholeheartedly agree were false gods; Mithras, Horus, Dionysus and several other "sun gods".

Whether he existed or not, Jesus has definitly saved more people after his supposed death. While I personally don't believe in any Son of God, I do concede that it is a powerful idea that has enabled many multitudes of people to turn their lives around.

Whether he existed or not, Jesus has definitly saved more people after his supposed death.

A logical contradiction.

An entity that never existed cannot "save" a fucking gnat.

A logical contradiction.

An entity that never existed cannot "save" a fucking gnat.
No shit. Did you read the post? I said that Jesus was a powerful idea. The idea of Jesus helps people turn thier lives around. It doesn't matter if there really is a Jesus. People think there is, and that thought gives them the confidence to change.

No shit. Did you read the post? I said that Jesus was a powerful idea. The idea of Jesus helps people turn thier lives around. It doesn't matter if there really is a Jesus. People think there is, and that thought gives them the confidence to change.
What a wonderful point.

Christianity as history and Christianity as a reality in people's lives are two different issues.

While I personally don't believe in any Son of God, I do concede that it is a powerful idea that has enabled many multitudes of people to turn their lives around.

Exactly the case exists with regards to Naziism and/or fascism.

It is a ''powerful idea'' that caused many multitudes of people to "turn their lives around".

It is not implicit in that statement whether or not said *turning* was toward something positive or toward something very negative.

_____________________________

Like other forms of religious fundamentalism, Christian fundamentalism is a dreaded doctrine of supremacy, a cult of hatred and a recipe for disaster......and with an avowed born-again Christian in the highest seat of power in America, who claims to be "appointed" to that position by God, and dictated by what he claims to be divine communication, it is horrifying to contemplate what further brutalities are in store for the world if Christian fundamentalism is allowed to remain unchallenged.

Your raising the subject of Fascism is unfortunate for your case. I could raise the "powerful idea" of motherhood.

That Christianity is a "powerful idea" is beyond question but tells us nothing except that it is a powerful idea.

Exactly the case exists with regards to Naziism and/or fascism.
Right, there are lots of powerful concepts out there. Whats your point?
It is a ''powerful idea'' that caused many multitudes of people to "turn their lives around".
Uh-huh. Thats what I just said.
It is not implicit in that statement whether or not said *turning* was toward something positive or toward something very negative.
Too true. I prefer to be optimistic whenever possible.
Like other forms of religious fundamentalism, Christian fundamentalism is a dreaded doctrine of supremacy, a cult of hatred and a recipe for disaster......and with an avowed born-again Christian in the highest seat of power in America, who claims to be "appointed" to that position by God, and dictated by what he claims to be divine communication, it is horrifying to contemplate what further brutalities are in store for the world if Christian fundamentalism is allowed to remain unchallenged.
I'm well aware of the dangers of zealotry. I know fundamentalists want to "re-criminalize" and execute homosexuals and adulterers. I've personally had a fundie say he'd kill me if it where legal.
However, I am not refering to religious crazies in my earlier statement.

The position of Christianity is that **Jesus is the one true god. He is the only god to have ever actually existed. All other gods are fabrications**.


That may be the opinions of some people, but that isn't necessarily the truth.
Look at the First Commandment:

"Thou Shall Worship No Other Gods Before Me."

This would imply that there are other Gods, but that we shouldn't put any of them before this one.

Your raising the subject of Fascism is unfortunate for your case.

?!?!

why?

It's just an example.

I could raise the "powerful idea" of motherhood.

Yes. You could. So?

That Christianity is a "powerful idea" is beyond question but tells us nothing except that it is a powerful idea.

That is the same idea that I was --evidently unsuccessfully-- trying to impart.

?!?!

why?

It's just an example.


Another example of fascism is your constant posting of fear-mongering opinion pieces... When i come on this site you might as well have your picture everywhere and have a slogan that says "Freethinker is watching you"

It took the entire process YAHSHUA needed to fullfill all the prophecy written about him, and he needed to die and rise again. It was the total package.

Another example of fascism is your constant posting of fear-mongering opinion pieces...

You think Free speech is fascism???

You wouldn't recognize fascism if it bit you.

he needed to die and rise again.

Actually the messianic prophesies don't say that anywhere.

It took the entire process YAHSHUA needed to fullfill all the prophecy written about him, and he needed to die and rise again. It was the total package.
If Jesus returns, let's kill him again.

If Jesus returns, let's kill him again.
Best out of three?

If Jesus returns, let's kill him again.

That's a disappointing statement from you, Evak, and one more immature than I thought you were capable of.

Jesus is not your god, as you have stated. That's fine.
However, there's no need to beliitle the God of some of the posters here.
Just plain bad manners and I believe you're aware of that.

Its a matter of faith, not fact. Religion gives comfort to zillions of people on a daily basis, are we gonna disect that also.

Actually the messianic prophesies don't say that anywhere.
The OT Messianic prophesies have nothing to say about Jesus dying and being resurrected, but this is a universal characteristic of the central figures in almost all Greek Mystery Cults (out of which we see the real origin of Christianity).

Horus (originally an Egyptian deity) was betrayed, killed, and resurrected, so were Heracles (Thracian), Dionysus (origin obscure--probably Asia Minor), and, of course, the originally Persian deity Mithra.

It is astonishing that these cults, all of which existed before Christianity, all have this theme.

The pattern was to find some foreign deity and weave a miraculous birth-betrayal-killing-resurrection-Ascension story out of him in the Greek mystery cult pattern (the body and blood of the sacrificed deity being the path to salvation).

(One needs some understanding of the cult phenomenon to appreciate this process. It is called syncretism--a rather conscious effort to merge different ideas from different religions. I am most familiar with it from my understanding of CaoDaism in Vietnam, which took French spiritualism of the nineteenth century and combined it with Taoist, Buddhist and Roman Catholic ideas to evolve Vietnam's most successful cult.)

People are not aware of how common in the Hellenistic world these cults were. That some Greek (not Jewish) group was attracted to the Jewish Messianic ideas and from it evolved what became Christianity makes far more sense than what the Gospels tell us. The Gospels (as we can tell from reading the Pauline Epistles closely), evolved their story well after the Christian cult was established in Asia Minor. (The genuine Pauline Epistles know nothing of the Gospel story).

If Jesus returns, let's kill him again.
HA! A common Buddhist slogan is, "If you meet the Buddha, kill him."

(The Buddha is in Nirvana, so if you meet him something is seriously wrong in the universe--and you do him, and maybe all the universe, a favor sending him back to Nirvana).

I think the slogan originated as a way to discourage people who have their own teaching making the claim that it came from some special communication from the Buddha. I think Christianity could use such a tradition.

[QUOTE=Thislin]The OT Messianic prophesies have nothing to say about Jesus dying and being resurrected, but this is a universal characteristic of the central figures in almost all Greek Mystery Cults (out of which we see the real origin of Christianity).


There are many prophesies about the death and resurrection of YAHSHUA in the OT. you are posting misinformation.or maybe you don't know The Bible very well.


Dan 9:26

26 "And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
NKJV

Ps 16:10
Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.
NKJV

[QUOTE=Thislin]The OT Messianic prophesies have nothing to say about Jesus dying and being resurrected, but this is a universal characteristic of the central figures in almost all Greek Mystery Cults (out of which we see the salvation).

Thislin you are full of it. All those false religions spawn from the remembrance of God's law after the flood. The reason is there was a prevailing memory of YAHWEH is it was given to Noahs family. even china has tales of the flood.

That's a disappointing statement from you, Evak, and one more immature than I thought you were capable of.
It's a slogan taken from a syndicated t-shirt. I'm sorry if you got offended, but I don't believe people should withhold themselves from posting statements for comical effect because it offends someone. A lot of modern humor is about attacking the sensibilities of people. People get so caught up in the idea of blasphemy sometimes that they forget to laugh, which is not exactly the best thing to do when laughing brings people together. I'm sure Jesus has a great sense of humor.

"How 'bout them Sanhedrin?"

Thislin you are full of it. All those false religions spawn from the remembrance of God's law after the flood. The reason is there was a prevailing memory of YAHWEH is it was given to Noahs family. even china has tales of the flood. Ohhh, I saw a movie with a great flood in it. I aslo believe that the sorceror mouse will return no matter how many dirty tricks that slave mop throws at him...

[QUOTE=Thislin]The OT Messianic prophesies have nothing to say about Jesus dying and being resurrected, but this is a universal characteristic of the central figures in almost all Greek Mystery Cults (out of which we see the real origin of Christianity).


There are many prophesies about the death and resurrection of YAHSHUA in the OT. you are posting misinformation.or maybe you don't know The Bible very well.


Dan 9:26

26 "And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
NKJV

Ps 16:10
Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.
NKJV

You are going to have to do a lot better than that. Those aren't even prophesies unless you take them out of context, and could be read dozens of ways.

[QUOTE=Thislin]The OT Messianic prophesies have nothing to say about Jesus dying and being resurrected, but this is a universal characteristic of the central figures in almost all Greek Mystery Cults (out of which we see the salvation).

Thislin you are full of it. All those false religions spawn from the remembrance of God's law after the flood. The reason is there was a prevailing memory of YAHWEH is it was given to Noahs family. even china has tales of the flood.

Wow! You actually think Noah's flood is hisory?

While there may be some local flood that got elevated into the story, anyone in the modern era who thinks the story as found in the Bible is literally true is, as far as I am concerned, utterly deluded.

The Buddha told us delusion was one of the four sources of human suffering.

(Although I promised myself to avoid quoting the Buddha, sinc you see no problem in quoting your authority, in your case I can see I can make an exception.)

[QUOTE=janrich456]

You are going to have to do a lot better than that. Those aren't even prophesies unless you take them out of context, and could be read dozens of ways.


I do not have to do better, if you don't understand them that is your problem.

I do not have to do better, if you don't understand them that is your problem.

Thats some funny logic.

It is everyone else's problem for not hearing the same voices as you. :rolleyes:

There are many prophesies about the death and resurrection of YAHSHUA in the OT.

Are there any if you leave the passages in-context? :)


Why don’t Jews believe that Jesus was the messiah? (http://www.askmoses.com/article.html?h=120&o=350)

by Rabbi Naftali Silberberg

Maimonides writes (Laws of Kings 11:4) the criteria for identifying the messiah: "If a king will arise from the House of David, diligent in Torah study and the fulfillment of Mitzvot - of the written and Oral Law – like David his ancestor, and will compel all the Jews to go in its [the Torah's] path . . and builds the Holy Temple and gathers the Diaspora [to the land of Israel], this is certainly the Messiah."

Jesus did not fulfill any of the basic duties of the Messiah.

Additionally, the Bible is replete with prophecies about the Messianic Era (see for example Isaiah 11) which were never realized.

To put it in simple words: If Jesus is the Messiah and this is what Redemption is all about -- who needs the Messiah? The Messiah I await will fulfill all the promises of world peace and global monotheism which are vividly described by the prophets.

For more info, see JewsForJudaism.com

I do not have to do better, if you don't understand them that is your problem.

Now I ask, might your arrogant response cause me to "stumble?"

You know I being to wonder if you are for real. A real Christian certainly would not behave in the arrogant, self-righteous, hateful way you behave. Could you be FT trying to make people like me hate Christians?

Originally Posted by janrich456
I do not have to do better, if you don't understand them that is your problem.

Could you be FT ......?

Even if I were to try, I could never feign the sort of abject ignorance displayed by janrich456.

Anyone who reads the following two verses --

Dan 9:26
26 "And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
NKJV

Ps 16:10
Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.
NKJV

.....and proclaims them to be -*prophecies of the death and resurrection of Yeshua* - has a loose grip on reality.

_______________________

If you believe, as is stated in the most popular "holy" book in America, that the supposed Creator of the universe spends time fretting over people who wear clothes made of wool and linen mixed, and those who eat shellfish......you are insane.

Even if I were to try, I could never feign the sort of abject ignorance displayed by janrich456.

It is hard to know these things, but when a "Christian" acts as a charicature of Christianity, with a mean spirit and a completely irrational argument, one is entitled to wonder if this might be a pretender engaging in misinformation. Since your approach is propaganda anyway, that you might enter onto such a propagandistic venture is not beyond reason.