evidence of jesus christ.
#21
You don't have to wait that long, Billy. Some people are already claiming it as a new religion, claiming to be part of that supposed lineage. I have met a family saying just that.

And what about L Ron Hubbard or Zechariah Sitchin? The both have hordes of followers decrying their science fiction as fact.
The TANAKH predates Rome and that's half the Bible.

Tradition says the original Roman kingdom (pre-dating the Roman Republic and Roman Empire) occurred around 735 B.C.E.
The TANAKH or Masoretic text as we know it can be traced to 200 B.C.E. The Great Assembly officially set the order of the books making up TANAKH in 450 B.C.E. and only about 6 characters (consonants) have been changed since then.
The christian BIBLE, however, changes with every printing.
PS. If you can, try your hand at giving some of the others a bit of feedback. If you already have, thanks, can you do some more?
Reply
#22
   A guy named Adam had a kid named Seth who had a kid named . . . David who had a kid named . . . . Jesus. I don't remember how many generations it adds up to, but being raised Pentecostal, I had to memorize them as a kid.
   I don't recite too many prayers these days, but it's hard to forget hearing the doctrine of Jesus because preachers and laymen all over America send a very defensive message. Their sermons are embedded with rebuttals to attacks (or perceived attacks) in the media; in schools and in the courts. The message is clear: No matter what 'proof' you find, no matter what taunt you throw, they believe in Jesus.
   This is a long thread and I don't remember who said it, but I agree that Christianity (Protestant or Catholic) doesn't teach full understanding of God's plan or offer proof of Jesus' godhead status. Rather it teaches faith in that which you cannot possibly comprehend. That being said, critics of christianity proclaim that the entire concept of faith seems like a way of luring in the weak-minded.
   But whether you have faith or not, Jesus is the center of it all. The Old Testament today is like Godfather III, nobody wants to read it and it sucks cause Brando (Jesus) ain't in it. I'm speaking, of course of my little corner of the world which is dominated by religions that commonly refer to themselves as 'Jesus-only' churches.
   These Pentecostal/Apostolic/Charasmatic church refute the baptismal formula provided in Matt. 28:19. They claim instead that the formula given in Acts 2:38 is correct and that the scripture in Matthew was mis-interpreted by the King James (and others before him.)
What I'm saying is, this is always gonna be a hot-topic as long as Christianity is a powerful religion like it is today.
   Long ago (325 A.D.) the Catholic church took a stand on the virgin birth and the dates of Christmas (and whether they would celebrate it at all) and a bunch of other stands based on information of dubious nature. 'Faith' kinda cleans the mess up and gives them a little closure. If there were factual evidence that Jesus Christ the man or God ever walked the Earth then I think it would've made the papers. That's all I'm saying.
Reply
#23
All I'm a saying at this point is we could have some hilariously serious discussions over drinks in my backyard. If I give you my background and that of the hubby's you wouldn't believe it anyway.
PS. If you can, try your hand at giving some of the others a bit of feedback. If you already have, thanks, can you do some more?
Reply
#24
Is your background so unbelieveable?
Reply
#25
Let's just say it's an odd fitting puzzle.
PS. If you can, try your hand at giving some of the others a bit of feedback. If you already have, thanks, can you do some more?
Reply
#26
(09-15-2011, 05:42 AM)AvariciousApathist Wrote:     These Pentecostal/Apostolic/Charasmatic church refute the baptismal formula provided in Matt. 28:19. They claim instead that the formula given in Acts 2:38 is correct and that the scripture in Matthew was mis-interpreted by the King James (and others before him.)
King James was a Mason... he was like the Dan Brown of the 16th century. I'm quite surprised his interpretation didn't include

"and the baptising priest shall tickle the infant with a peacock feather whilst shaking the left hand of the father behind the mother's back and performing a sideways jig with his right kneecap"
It could be worse
Reply
#27
I know people that think if a person isn't completely immersed in water then their soul is doomed for Hell even though the intent was there. If that's not proof that people will believe anything . . .
Reply
#28
I'm pretty sure those are the same sorts of people who believe that showing your knees in public is a mortal sin.

Some people get off on finding fault with others.
It could be worse
Reply
#29
Bingo. I've heard of people painting the gold buckles on their shoes to show their humility.
Reply
#30
If they were really humble they'd just walk through cow shit.
It could be worse
Reply
#31
Or play with a venomous snake . . . yep, they do that too. My favorite thing is when you break it to one of them that Jesus wasn't born on December 25th, they lose their mind and call you the devil.
Reply
#32
Here's what really gets them going: suggesting that Lucifer's fall was because God's judgment was impaired (probably where Noah got his love of wine from when you think about it), which means that He couldn't be infallible and as everyone knows, if you make one mistake everyone knows about, there are plenty of others you're trying to cover up...
It could be worse
Reply
#33
Hysterical I used to go to church JUST to say that Eve banged the serpent in the garden and then adam partook as well. But before I dropped that bomb I would get them to agree that sex could be called 'the forbidden fruit' hahaha that phrase isn't even in the bible.
Reply
#34
And that's why women today are obsessed with scales.
It could be worse
Reply
#35
please (everyone) stay somewhere near topic/admin
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!