Jesus and his sacrifice is Satan’s test of man’s morality.

But Faith, so far there has been no anti-Christian rhetoric posted.

Except, of course, neither you or anyone else has ever been able to show that any Old Testament passage refers to Jesus and in fact every single example you or anyone else has put forward has been shown to be either misrepresentation or taking quotes out of context.However, if you want to continue making such false assertions I will happily start yet another thread where you can once again try to support your position.

In other words you can't provide support for your asserted "understanding" as expected.

Bring any support you think you can actually muster over to a thread Faith. The issue is not what the can men can try to peddle but rather what can actually be supported.

If Jesus did say that then yes, he was mistaken.Remember that the author(s) of the gospel of John were writing a revisionist document trying to market a different picture of the character Jesus and that he(they) also often went from quoting to editorial comment with no indication that it was not an actual quote from Jesus.Also note that as was so often the case, no details were included; no list of verses or passages that could then be tested to verify or refute the assertion.Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

As pointed out above, notice no specifics are included so that the assertions could be verified.Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

I don't doubt folk believed and tried to market such things but that says absolutely nothing about whether or not such a belief could be in anyway justified or true.Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

Actually Faith, what would satisfy me would be ANY evidence that it was true but as been shown here at EvC repeatedly not one single Old Testament verse can be shown to relate to Jesus.Unsupported assertions of course carry no weight and rightly so. Hell, some Christians even believe nonsense like a young earth or that evolution is not a fact or that one of the Biblical Flood myths actually happened.

It's not that funny (sad perhaps) that millions believe such nonsense. Many people accept unsupported assertions without question. In fact that is the whole base of the Christian Cult of Ignorance.But the fact remains, so far no one has every been able to support any example presented of an Old Testament that refers to Jesus.

Except, of course, for the fact that none of the Jewish Messiah prophecies concern a Messiah who does not rule bodily as a Prince or King. Should Jesus actually return then it might be claimed that he really is the Jewish Messiah; but according to the New Testament stories that is not what happened.Yes, I agree that the first generation followers of Jesus did likely view him as the Messiah but only by totally revising the Jewish understanding and writings on the subject and that they marketed the cult of Jesus based on those revisions.

But did not rule and was not a Prince or King or leader of Israel. But many other people in the Bible stories were also resurrected so the simple fact of resurrection is unrelated to any Messianic claims. Jesus was in no way unique when considering either his death or his resurrection.But wait...there's more.There was the Ascension and the promise from Jesus that during their lifetimes he would return as a warlord and ruler, kick ass and take names and bring about the end of times battles and win them. He would judge and punish and reward.They believed all that. They believed the revolution was imminent.That was the first real crisis of Faith when they all started dying off and yet Jesus had not returned. It was not going to happen in their lifetimes.That was when the revisionism really set in and the Messianic picture had to be modified to something in the unspecified future initially and then to "otherworldly", "Not of THIS world".By 30 years or so after Jesus death it was clear the End was not near and people either had to abandon the Messianic claims or revise the Messianic claims to fit with the reality.

The Epistle predate the Gospels, at least the known Gospels. Paul in particular is simply building a franchise and his message constantly evolved based on audience and era.Look at the evolution of the story of Paul's encounter as it expanded with retelling and the changes in the Great Commission over time. In both cases a relatively straight forward account got wooified and changed. They expected the end times because Jesus said the would happen during their lifetimes.Much of Paul's objections to marriage seem to revolve around the imminent end times, there simply would not be time to raise kids before the end.And nowhere does resuscitation enter into any of the stories of others resurrected. They are dead and made alive. It's not just one instance either but many.Look at the apocalyptic writings of the era. They do not show some cumbaya let's all get together and be alright times, they call for war and killings and punishment and suffering. Even the Gospels point to that.

quote:

---

John 5
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

---