Foxy Methoxy Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 Lets assume the bible is fiction. That's not an assumption. That's akin to stating the sky is blue, water is wet, and a pyramid is wider at its base than at its top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy Methoxy Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 Jesus very much so on more than one occasion claimed to be God, and throughout the Bible we are told over and over that God is to be worshiped. That's weak sauce. Jesus instructs his followers to pray to the Father. If he deemed himself worthy of worship, he would have directed his followers to pray to him, not the father. What I enjoy most about the apostasy of Christianity is how Jesus was voted in as God in 325 at the First Council of Nicea. They also decided God was a Trinity at this time. But they waited until the First Council of Constantinople in 360 to declare the Holy Spirit as the other third. So from 325 to 360, God is a Trinity where only two parts are known. And to this day, Catholics and Protestants reach for any weak evidence to support these councils were acting under the guidance of God in spite of common sense and history pointing to these beliefs being completely baseless and worthless. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaiah5511 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 That's weak sauce. When you only read, or at least quote, my last sentence, of course it is. Read the proof I gave at the beginning, don't skip over it then call it weak. Prove that it's weak. You guys are all about "proof". I gave the verse where He claims to be God. Don't change the subject with the trinity, that's a different thread. You claimed that Jesus never said He was God, I showed differently. So instead of changing the subject, read what I wrote and try your best to prove your statement is true and not mine by what the Bible says, not just giving your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christ Calaway Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 That's weak sauce. When you only read, or at least quote, my last sentence, of course it is. Read the proof I gave at the beginning, don't skip over it then call it weak. Prove that it's weak. You guys are all about "proof". I gave the verse where He claims to be God. Don't change the subject with the trinity, that's a different thread. You claimed that Jesus never said He was God, I showed differently. So instead of changing the subject, read what I wrote and try your best to prove your statement is true and not mine by what the Bible says, not just giving your opinion. haha I love this People on here love to call "Believers" posts 'weak' or 'wrong' but then just change the subject and never give a good reason why. Good to see another believer on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy Methoxy Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 The Greek word he used, heis, is the word for the number one. It is a reference to the Shema, the core tenet of Judaism, "Sh'ma, Yisrael, Adonai Eloheynu Adonai echad," which, using Christian terminology is, "Hear, O Israel, Jehovah is our God. Jehovah is one." So you're taking a single Greek word and attempting to connect it to a Hebrew phrase and providing this is as an absolute? Nice try. I'll have to refer you to my favorite book. Verily, let it be known that your words are weak sauce. The Gospel According to Foxy 10:66 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christ Calaway Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 So you're taking a single Greek word and attempting to connect it to a Hebrew phrase and providing this is as an absolute? Nice try. I'll have to refer you to my favorite book. Still avoiding the real question... For right now forget about the Greek and Hebrew, He wasn't trying to say that the Greek word is used in the Hebrew phrase. Just look at the first part of his post, the one with the verse. Or any of the verses for that matter. It's those verses that are proving you wrong, not the Greek word. We can discuss the second part of His post after you try and prove how any of those verse don't show that Jesus claimed to be God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy Methoxy Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 Avoiding? No. Reading the usual circular logic. Do Christians ever wonder why it is impossible to have a conversation with people, even other Christians? Do they ever ponder the reason they are social retards is because of circular logic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Anyway, if you based your beliefs solely on the Bible with no outside interference, what would your religious beliefs be? I think they would be inconsistent and in internal conflict. But then I think nearly any codifiable system of religion is going to be the same way. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy Methoxy Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 Anyway, if you based your beliefs solely on the Bible with no outside interference, what would your religious beliefs be? I think they would be inconsistent and in internal conflict. Certainly, and thus forcing believers to make stretches in logic by bridging Greek text to misunderstood aspects of Hebrew mysticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christ Calaway Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 haha wow....didn't think you would still be avoiding the question. Your getting progressively worse too. At first at least you talked about the last part of his post and only avoided the first part. Now you completely all together changed the subject and avoided all the verses that prove you wrong. By avoiding those verse that prove that Jesus Christ said He was God only shows that you can't defend your claim. Call us circular logic and social outcasts by all means. But at least we can backup why we think your wrong....as far as I'm concerned, your avoided it because you can't answer it. So go on and continue changing the subject as I'm sure you will. Just tell me when you can actually back-up and prove your statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 1. Jesus never commands his followers to worship him and never claims to be God. Your very first sentence, of your very first point, is flawed. John 10:30 "I and the Father are one." *Here is a few more verses if that one is "misunderstood" - John 14:7-10 John 14:11 John 10:37-38 Matthew 27:43 John 17:11 I am guessing that your quesstion following this will be somewhat like this, "When Jesus said 'I and the Father are one' He just mean they are of one accord, they are merely like-minded." The Greek word he used, heis, is the word for the number one. It is a reference to the Shema, the core tenet of Judaism, "Sh'ma, Yisrael, Adonai Eloheynu Adonai echad," which, using Christian terminology is, "Hear, O Israel, Jehovah is our God. Jehovah is one." Jesus very much so on more than one occasion claimed to be God, and throughout the Bible we are told over and over that God is to be worshiped. Show me objective evidence that Jesus existed and that Jesus claimed to be God. Oh and please note that stories written anonymously long after the time Jesus supposedly lived and by people who could have never seen him do not count as evidence. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 That's weak sauce. When you only read, or at least quote, my last sentence, of course it is. Read the proof I gave at the beginning, don't skip over it then call it weak. What proof? I must be confused. Is the subject of this discussion the content of literature? I thought the subject was regarding if a real man made a certain claim. Offering content of literature doesn't address the question of a real man making a certain claim. Prove that it's weak. You guys are all about "proof". I gave the verse where He claims to be God. Don't change the subject with the trinity, that's a different thread. You claimed that Jesus never said He was God, I showed differently. So instead of changing the subject, read what I wrote and try your best to prove your statement is true and not mine by what the Bible says, not just giving your opinion. Behold the Gospel of Zod: Zod 1:1 Jesus said "I am not God and I never claimed to be God" Well there you have it! This is solid proof that Jesus never said he was God. After all books written by people who never met Jesus count as proof don't they? If so then I submit the Gospel of Zod as evidence. If not then the Gospel of John isn't evidence either. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 That's weak sauce. When you only read, or at least quote, my last sentence, of course it is. Read the proof I gave at the beginning, don't skip over it then call it weak. Prove that it's weak. You guys are all about "proof". I gave the verse where He claims to be God. Don't change the subject with the trinity, that's a different thread. You claimed that Jesus never said He was God, I showed differently. So instead of changing the subject, read what I wrote and try your best to prove your statement is true and not mine by what the Bible says, not just giving your opinion. Selecting points in a book of fiction (the bible) to prove some other point in its own fictional story is like arguing points about Stark Trek. Only Star Trek is more fun. But equally as unimportant as the bible. The bible doesnt provide proof. The bible does not provide evidence. It provides a story. On the other hand if god appeared in person to me and several other people simultaneously I might sit up and take notice. I would also demand some proof, like asking him to move a mountain, for instance. The fact is that no one claiming to be god does appear to large groups of people and perform impossible things, ever. You might point out in the bible some miracle, but I could point out in Star Trek that the Enterprise travels at warp speed. Why should I believe what it says in the bible but not Star Trek? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy Methoxy Posted January 2, 2012 Author Share Posted January 2, 2012 So you're taking a single Greek word and attempting to connect it to a Hebrew phrase and providing this is as an absolute? Nice try. I'll have to refer you to my favorite book. Still avoiding the real question... For right now forget about the Greek and Hebrew, He wasn't trying to say that the Greek word is used in the Hebrew phrase. Just look at the first part of his post, the one with the verse. Or any of the verses for that matter. It's those verses that are proving you wrong, not the Greek word. We can discuss the second part of His post after you try and prove how any of those verse don't show that Jesus claimed to be God. You need to re-read the original post. I don't believe the Bible is infallible and if I attempt to, it creates an absurd tale. This is my opinion. Rather than attempting to school me on Greek and Hebrew, why don't you share your thoughts with the group as to what the Bible tells you, seeing as you apparently do consider it infallible. Please, share your thoughts and opinions. What kind of story, using only the Bible and not the councils of Nicea and Constantinople, do you read? We are allowed to read the same text and come to different conclusions. And I feel no need to prove anything to you. Nor should you feel the need to prove anything to me. This is a discussion. What we do in discussions is discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eugene39 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Jesus very much so on more than one occasion claimed to be God, and throughout the Bible we are told over and over that God is to be worshiped. I generally don't use Wikipedia, but you might find this interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_have_been_considered_deities Jesus is not the first or last person who claimed to be God. Actually, we don't know if Jesus ever said that He was or not. He didn't write anything down, not that we would have to accept that as "proof" anyway. Do you accept the writings of others who claim to be God? And if not, why not? We don't actually even know if Jesus ever existed. My hunch is that the myth of Jesus is based upon a person who lived about that time, combined with a bunch of the other demi-gods who were also "in existence" about that same time. And by the way, we don't know if God exists, either. It's interesting to me how you Christians keep coming in here, thinking you are going to prove something to us. We used to be, as the name of the web site says, Christians ourselves. When I read the Bible through in a year at the suggestion of my SS teacher, it was completely unintentional that I would eventually leave the faith. I did it to strengthen my faith but in the end, it destroyed it. I'm convinced that anyone who reads the Bible through without trying to look at it through Christian goggles, but just taking it for what it says, will leave fundamentalist Christianity also, at a bare minimum. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
expat674 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 The gospel of John is inspired scripture too, with the intent of showing forth the Deity of Jesus. Inspired by Satan? Inspired by the Easter Bunny? You are just repeating something you wish was true. You have no way to know if any of it was "inspired". Saying the scripture is inspired by Satan may just be blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. He lives, He lives, Christ Jesus lives today. He walks with me, He talks with me, through life's rough, narrow way. He lives, He lives, salvation to impart...You ask me how I know He lives...He lives within my heart. Other gospels had different purposes. Matthew was to win the Jews, Mark to win the Gentiles, and Luke to show forth the humantiy of Jesus. John did not just make up a story, he related his experience of Jesus based on memory. Otherwise, he was a liar, and by his own writings condemned himself to the lake of fire (Revelation 21:8) Matthew was most likely a late re-write of the Gospel of the Hebrews with large sections edited to give it a completely different spin. Mark was probably written by a Roman and it originally ended with an empty tomb. The rest of it was added later by someone else. Luke was written by an unknown man who was trying to make Paul look legitimate. The Gospel of John was written by a man who never met Jesus. The Temple of Jerusalem had probably been destroyed before the author of John's Gospel had even been born. The author of John's Gospel did not write Revelation. John was a common name. So you're not only a blasphemer but a liar. John wrote John and Revelation. Matthew, even Levi(a disiciple) wrote Matthew . John Mark, Barnabas' nephew, wrote Mark (Acts 15:38-39). Luke the physician, who wrote Acts, also wrote Luke. John was some 90 years old when he wrote Revelation and John, and yes, he was born about the same time as Jesus. I am sorry, but you cannot use the same text to verify its own authenticity nor its validity. Also, by calling mymistake an apostate and a liar, have you not just acted in the same way as the Pharisees and teachers of the law in the story of the adulterous woman? What did Jesus say about sin and casting stones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy Methoxy Posted January 3, 2012 Author Share Posted January 3, 2012 Speaking of the Gospel of John, who is "the apostle whom Christ loved?" To me, it seems like Jesus is arguing with a woman, possibly his wife. If it is, as Catholic scholars believe, young apostle John, then Jesus was a creepy pedophile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Hi! Perhaps it might help if we defined what it is we mean by the word, "infallible"? Ok, this may seem blindingly obvious, but imho, a proper definition of terms is very helpful in any debate. This page... http://en.wikipedia....l_infallibility ...suggests that to understand Biblical Infallibility correctly, it's also necessary to define what is meant by... Biblical Inerrancy ...and Biblical Integrity Any thoughts, folks? BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy Methoxy Posted January 3, 2012 Author Share Posted January 3, 2012 This isn't a debate. It's a discussion. Unfortunately, when true believers get ruffled, they get debatey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Oh , ok... this discussion. My bad. BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy Methoxy Posted January 3, 2012 Author Share Posted January 3, 2012 Some are master debatey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Speaking of the Gospel of John, who is "the apostle whom Christ loved?" To me, it seems like Jesus is arguing with a woman, possibly his wife. If it is, as Catholic scholars believe, young apostle John, then Jesus was a creepy pedophile. Maybe John was his boy toy. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotBlinded Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 1. Jesus never commands his followers to worship him and never claims to be God. Your very first sentence, of your very first point, is flawed. John 10:30 "I and the Father are one." *Here is a few more verses if that one is "misunderstood" - John 14:7-10 John 14:11 John 10:37-38 Matthew 27:43 John 17:11 I am guessing that your quesstion following this will be somewhat like this, "When Jesus said 'I and the Father are one' He just mean they are of one accord, they are merely like-minded." The Greek word he used, heis, is the word for the number one. It is a reference to the Shema, the core tenet of Judaism, "Sh'ma, Yisrael, Adonai Eloheynu Adonai echad," which, using Christian terminology is, "Hear, O Israel, Jehovah is our God. Jehovah is one." Jesus very much so on more than one occasion claimed to be God, and throughout the Bible we are told over and over that God is to be worshiped. If you only took that to the depts that it was meant to be taken. John is the "mystic" of the bunch. In a mystical sense, when he has Jesus saying, "I and the Father are one." he is meaning that, indeed, in a literal sense, but it also means that they are too. You do know the disciple's prayer that Jesus prays to God don't you? Something along the lines of, Father, let them be one with you as I am one with you. Oh, here it is: Jhn 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: You need to go deeper... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy Methoxy Posted January 4, 2012 Author Share Posted January 4, 2012 Speaking of the Gospel of John, who is "the apostle whom Christ loved?" To me, it seems like Jesus is arguing with a woman, possibly his wife. If it is, as Catholic scholars believe, young apostle John, then Jesus was a creepy pedophile. Maybe John was his boy toy. :-) That's only if you believe John was the apostle whom Christ loved. I believe the apostle whom Christ loved was Mary Magdalene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 The Gospel of John was written long after everybody who might have ever met Jesus was dead. The disciple whom Jesus loved was probably the favorite hero of whatever sect the Gospel of John was written for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts