Jump to content

dario

Authentic Christian Believer
  • Content Count

    74
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About dario

  • Rank
    Doubter
  • Birthday 09/08/1983

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
  • Interests
    Sports

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?
    Christian God
  1. Hey Panther, I checked out the website that you gave me. The writer definitely gave a lot of accusations about Christianity originating from other pagan religions, but he failed to give proof on it. He had a link to "The Jesus Mysteries" where he got most of his info, but there wasn't any information on it. I typed in Pagan religions compared to Christianity on a search engine and it gave more information saying why Christianity didn't come from other pagan religions. I will admit however, that most of those sites are Christian sites, but they do have quotes from secular writers. Anyway, here is one site I went to that kind of talks about The Jesus Mysteries: http://faithcommons.org/node/206
  2. Hey all, sorry about the late post. I know I said I would post monday, but I've been too busy lately to even study up on my position. I know a couple of you gave information on pagan religions, so I'll try to read those and let you know what I think. Thanks again for being patient. "Hi Ho the" Dario
  3. Hey Asimov, sorry I haven't responded sooner to your posts, I have been pretty busy lately. I won't be able to post tonight because I am spending time with my wife. This weekend will be difficult also, so expect a post monday. Sorry about the delay. I also am trying to research more info. Want to get my stuff right.
  4. Ok, first off I want to say that the reason I chose to talk about Jesus, when talking about which God I worship, is because Jesus is easier to define than God is. It is easier to see what Jesus stood for. The reason why I didn't start off by explaining why I follow "God" is because it is much more difficult. I will be honest, the things I know about God, all-knowing, all-powerful, are because I either read accounts saying he was these things, or because i heard it from the pastor. I haven't personally tried studying God's character, because I knew I was getting into something that was hard to understand. Don't misinterpret this by saying "You know deep down there is no such thing." I just know there isn't a lot of information into God's character. We can only figure that out by the things he does and says. So with that said, I hope you can understand why I am not first, explaining God, but instead, Jesus. I need to study who God was before I can start explaining him. Also, I'm sorry if it seems like my responses are coming in late. The computer I use is in my Aunt's room and she goes to bed early. Another reason is that a lot of you are refuting my information with other information so I am trying to figure everything out by reading books and what not. I really am trying to look for proof. Anyway, I'm going to go to bed now, but tomorrow I will try and provide more evidence about Jesus and the Gospels. Pariah, about your questions concerning God, that question will have to wait until I get more information. I hope you understand. Hope you all have a good night. Go Browns!
  5. Hi, Panther, thank you for being courteous. In answer to your question, I went to an Evangelical Mennonite Church, which eventually changed its name to Fellowship of Evangelical Christian, dropping the Mennonite name. I then went to a non-demoninational church that is well known in Northwestern Ohio. And now I just moved to Cleveland with my wife and we are just starting to get involved in another Fellowship of Evangelical Christians. However, this church is a little bit different than the one I used to go to. This church is more seeker centered meaning it focuses more on the non-Christians in the community. Anyway, I just wanted to let you in on my motives for being here. I am not here just to debate with all of you and get you to accept Christianity again. I enjoy discussing these topics and digging deeper into my faith. Going to forums like this encourage me to seek the real truth and not the "truth" I hear behind the pulpit. However, I don't want to mislead anybody into thinking that I am seeking the answers because I'm questioning. I am not seeking because I question my faith. I am seeking because it is good to have a strong foundation in my faith. I have faith that God will lead me to the truth. If I come to what I think is a wall, I need to research more. Just letting you know where I am at.
  6. First off, I want to thank you Asimov for your apology, even though I don't think you insulted me. I also apologize if I ever offended you, for that was not my intention. You would have to agree with me that it can become pretty heated in here when we each have strong beliefs in certain things. I will try to remain calm. You are correct in saying that Jesus was a man, but I believe that he was also God. However, before we start going into that subject I think it is appropriate that we first see if Jesus was a real figure in history. Thankful, I promise that I will try to explain why I think Jesus claimed to be God, but I think we should first prove in Jesus' existence. Obviously, the bible says there was a man named Jesus, but we need information outside of the bible. I've been doing some research and found a few documents that have mentioned Jesus. I'm not going to write everything down that I found because of the quantity, however, if you want I can expound on my info. In the first century, Josephus, a Jewish historian, wrote The Antiquities, which was a history of the Jewish people from Creation until his time. In The Antiquities he describes how a high priest named Ananius took advantage of the death of the Roman governor Festus-who is also mentioned in the New Testament-in order to have James killed. Another passage says, 'He convened a meeting of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named, James, the brother of Jesus, who was called the Christ, and certain others.' Another passage out of The Antiquities: "About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvelous things about him. And the tribe of Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared." There are 3 phrases out of this passage that Christian copyists might have inserted. 1)"if indeed one ought to call him a man." 2)"He was the Christ." 3)"On the third day he appeared to them restored to life." Another historic writer, Tacitus, in A.D. 115, writes: "Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischievous superstitution, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome...Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty: then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind." This is an important testimony by an unsympathetic witness to the success and spread of Christianity, based on a historical figure-Jesus-who was crucified under Pontius Pilate. And it's significant that Tacitus reported that an 'immense multitude' held so strongly to their beliefs that they were willing to die rather than recant. Here is the last one I am going to share with you, sorry about the lenghth of this post. In book 10 of Pliny the Younger's letters he specifically refers to the Christians he has arrested. "I have asked them if they are Christians, and if they admit it, I repeat the question a second and third time, with a warning of the punishment awaiting them. If they persist, I order them to be led away for execution; for, whatever the nature of their admission, I am convinced that their stubbornness and unshakable obstinacy ought not to go unpunished....They also declared that the sum total of their guilt or error amounted to no more than this: they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately amongst themselves in honor of Christ as if to a god, and also to bind themselves by oath, not for any criminal purpose, but to abstain from theft, robbery, and adultery... This made me decide it was all the more necessary to extract the truth by torture from two slave-women, whom they called deaconnesses. I found nothing but a degenerate sort of cult carried to extravagant lenghths." This was probably written about A.D. 111, and it attests to the rapid spread of Christianity, both in the city and in the rural area, among every class of persons, slave women as well as Roman citizens, since he also says he sends Christians who are Roman citizens to Rome for trial. We can conclude seven different things about Jesus from ancient non-Christian sources: 1) Jesus was a Jewish teacher. 2) Many people believed that he performed healings and exorcisms. 3) Some people believed he was the messiah. 4) He was rejected by the Jewish leaders. 5) He was crucified under Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius. 6) Despite this shameful death, his followers, who believed that he was still alive, spread beyond Palestine so that there were multitudes of them in Rome by A.D. 64. 7) All kinds of people from the cities and countryside-men and women, slave and free- worshipped him as God. That is some of the information that I found concerning Jesus; if that looks agreeable, I can move on to the other statements about Jesus claiming to be God. Once again, I apologize for the length of this post.
  7. I want to thank those of you who waited patiently for my responses instead of hurrying me. Panther, I just want to let you know that I read a few of the testimonies when I first came to this site. I had no doubt in my mind that a lot of these people were once strong Christians. I do understand where a lot of them are coming from, so I apologize if I ever sounded like I know more about the bible than some of you. I realize that I don't. I said I would define to you the "God" that I worship. Seeing that there were given many attributes to the God of the bible, I will start by saying that I worship Jesus, who claimed to be God. If this is a fair enough statement, then I eagerly await the responses of others. If it is not, then give me your objections and I will try to elaborate. I also want to mention to those who have doubts about me, I am not just sitting here debating with you without actually doing research. I have been to the library several times checking out books on the authenticy(sp?) of the bible and Jesus. I have been taking notes on key issues that we are talking about. I must admit, however, that it has been rather difficult to "study" since I've been out of school for awhile.(When I say awhile I mean 4 years, which I realize many of you have been out far longer than that) I also want to state that many of you are posing very difficult questions, that either, A. I don't have the information to answer it right away or B. It is unanswerable. Now, obviously I don't think we have had many questions that are unanswerable, so I don't have to worry about that one. I want to let everyone know that I sincerely appreciate your questions. Some of you who question me are sincere about it, while others are....less sincere. Whatever the case, it is getting me to think. I enjoy doing research on this topic(maybe not as much with the science stuff) so I want to thank you for pushing me. Just to let everyone know I am only 22 years old. I became a Christian when I was 10 years old and didn't start walking in the faith until high school. I live in Cleveland where I am a devoted Browns fan.(Please abstain from any negative remarks you care to make about this) If you don't want to listen to my comments on God, then listen to this. Super Bowl baby!!
  8. Thank you panther for your post, and I believe you were sincere. I promise I will try to respond to this post later, but I'm running late as it is. Thank you really for your sincerity.
  9. I apologize to the people who are waiting for certain responses from me, just understand that I'm getting a lot of information thrown at me. Please be patient in waiting for my responses. I am a man who trusts in God. I trust that what the bible says is fact. I trust that there really was a man named Jesus, both because the bible says so and because other writings have proved it. I believe in what Jesus stood for and the things he commanded us to stand for. The facts way too heavily in favor of Jesus and the things he did, that I can't ignore them or try to explain them away. I have seen many attempts at trying to disprove it, but none stand true with the evidence given. Now because I trust and have faith in God does not mean that I'm going to test him. Does it make sense, that because Jesus said "believers" will be able to drink poison and not be harmed, that I go and drink poison to see if it is true? No, this does not make sense, however, this does not mean that, when forced to drink poison, a christian has not come away from it unharmed. I can find you many stories of christians healing people and christians speaking in tongues. Does this mean I can drink poison without being harmed? I don't want to find out. If I do it just to find out, then probably not, but if for some reason, I am forced to because I'm a christian, then who knows? I need to go now, but the next question that I will try to get to is defining my God.
  10. I looked at the website, www.infidels.com, that you gave me, eponymic and here are a few that I found. There were a lot of verses so I'm not going to list them all. Which first--beasts or man?GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. I'm not sure which version of the bible these verses come out of, but the word, AND, that I have in bold, is actually NOW in my bible. This changes the whole meaning of the sentence around, don't you agree? Who was at the Empty Tomb? Is it: MAT 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. MAR 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. JOH 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre. Here we have 3 different accounts of who went to the empty tomb. Matthew only has 2 people going to the tomb, Mark has 3, and John has 1. In all 3 accounts, we have Mary Magdalene. Now wouldn't it be more suspicious if all 3 writers had written the same thing, even though they come from different perspectives? The fact is they complement each other rather than contradict. Just because one writer doesn't include all of the people that were at the tomb, doesn't mean they weren't there. For example, when you have 2 pens, you will always have 1 pen. When there is 2, there is always 1. Does that kind of make sense with what I am talking about? If not, I understand, I am not the best writer nor do I give good analogical examples. Who is the father of Joseph?MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli. To avoid a long story(I can give you one if you wish), Heli is Joseph's father-in-law; Mary's father. Whom did they see at the tomb? MAT 28:2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. MAT 28:3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: MAT 28:4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. MAT 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. MAR 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted. LUK 24:4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments: JOH 20:12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. I give the same reasoning for this one, that I gave to the other one concerning the tomb. Here are the few, out of the many, that I tried to answer for you. Remember, which I know you will, these are just my interpretations of why these verses don't contradict each other. They may be right or they may be wrong, but would you admit if they were right?
  11. I'm very familiar with these verses, not because I've read them in the bible a lot, but because they are often quoted in here. Didn't the apostles do the exact things Jesus said they would do in Mark 16? Just because we don't see it happening all of the time doesn't mean it never happened. Acts has plenty of verses telling about how the apostles were doing such things. It happened and Jesus predicted it would happen. So far your "one thing" did not declare Jesus false. I would like you to show me the "plenty more" that you have.
  12. You are putting people into to big of boxes, and seem to be totally ignoring all the people who have been touting deism to you so far. There are plenty of people here who believe in evolution and God, just not the biblical God. And that's because we have plenty of evidence against Biblical god, but not enough substantial evidence to disprove the notion of a God creator in principal. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ok, I realize that I have been talking to a lot of people who believe in a God. There were some people who said they did not believe in a God and that's who I was mostly communicating to. If it is ok with everyone here, I would like to change gears to a different subject, but one, that has been hinted to. "And that's because we have plenty of evidence against Biblical god" -eponymic Ok, so most of you believe in a God, but not the "biblical god." What evidence, which you said you have, can you give me to disprove the bible god? If you think this is just my agenda to witness to you then don't bother answering the question. I want people to answer that say they have evidence against Christianity and its God.
  13. Just because I'm not educated in a certain theory does not mean that my proof in God is shattered. There is information on both sides of the arguement. One side says they have proof in evolution and so there is no need for a "God." The other side, however, says there is not enough valid evidence supporting evolution. So which side is correct? Is it possible that God used evolution to create mankind? I have no idea because, one, I am not educated in that area, and two, I don't know the mind of God, assuming there is a God. So you and whoever else can give me all of the "evidence" you want in disproving God, if that is your intent, but it still won't be 100% guaranteed. I can sit here and give you all the proof I have into why the bible is true, why there really was such a person as Jesus, and why the ressurrection is true. You still will refute it because you don't want to believe it. In my opionion, a lot of people believe in things such as evolution to avoid believing in God. I can make the same arguement by saying those people are ignorant. Those people who call me ignorant do so in accordance with what they believe in, why can't I do the same thing?
  14. I would like to apologize for any confusion I may have caused when I was talking about evolution and the universe. I am not educated in either of these areas and so I will no longer argue for them.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.