What you want to know about Christ.

Ok, obviously, the Bible is a book. It was inspired by God, but it can't run around and tell the world what's inside, can it? That is the job that God has given the church. (or churches, seeing as there are so many). So, if you don't mind, I think that the question should be rephrased to say; 'How good a job is the church doing of its purpose of spreading the Bible?' To be honest, I don't think that the church as a whole is doing that great a job. That is one of the reasons I started this thread, to reach those who have questions and are searching for something more in their lives.Thankyou for your honest questions, and God Bless you, my brother/sister in Christ. I pray that you would come to know Him personally. He wants to get to know you.

No. There has only ever been one true God. The thing is, God was writing the story. Through His prophets, people, whoever, God was writing the story. He is still writing your story today, and you can take it or leave it. God has been around forever, literally, so I think I trust His wisdom and experience more than my own. Trust, belief, faith, hope and love. God gives all. I choose to give it back.God Bless you, my brother/sister in Christ. I pray and hope you will come to trust Him, love Him, hope in Him, have faith in Him and know Him. Forever.

The word 'Scripture', when used in the New Testament of the Bible, refers to the Old Testament, which was all their was of the Bible then.

Actually it refers to far more than the Torah, including many books that did not make it into any Canon.Scripture refers to any writings that are inspired.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well it is pretty obvious that that is simply false since there is not even one unique collection of books that are recognized as "The Bible".See The Bible was NOT man made, it was Godly made.It is also pretty obvious since it contains many contradictions and outright falsehoods that it is not written by God or that God is a liar.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

If you believe in evolution, you must believe in some sort of miracles?

---

Not at all.

quote:

---

How could chemicals randomly arrange themselves into a molecule,

---

Er, chemicals are made of molecules, so I don't really know what point you hoped to make here.

quote:

---

and then a cell?

---

The cell didn't just "randomly" arrange itself. There are many known intermediate steps between "molecule" and "cell".This may come as a shock to you, but just because you, personally, have no idea how something in nature could have occurred doesn't mean that nobody else does.Your personal incredulity is irrelevant to the validity of the ToE.I strongly suggest that you spend some time in the science forums to improve your knowledge of Biological Evolution.

quote:

---

Miraculous, though not true if you ask me. My point is that you have to believe in a miracle somewhere. Like faith, it's unavoidable.

---

No, I really don't have to believe in any such thing.Please stop trying to raise your arbitrary, culturally-based religious faith up to the same level as emperical evidence-based acceptance of facts.I must say that if your goal is starting this thread was to evangelize and draw people closer to your faith, displaying the typical religious rejection and ignorance of science and evolution will run counter to your aims.Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Then this means Jesus had a penis. And if he had a penis he had to have a Y chromosome. Where did he get his Y chromosome? Not from Mary, that's for sure; she never had any. And not from God either, since He doesn't have any chromosomes (unless you have a Biblical citation on this).Maybe Jesus got his Y chromosome miraculous from the Satan, who has worked with God in the past to mess around with good people, like Job for instance. Or maybe Joseph got in a quick one just before God had His immaculate shot at Mary.Jesus would have been easier to explain if he had been born a girl.”HM

I'm sorry but that is bullshit. It is possible to determine that the earth is close to spherical without traveling around it, and only those who are Willfully Ignorant would even make such a claim. The knowledge that the world is a sphere and even its diameter were conclusions based on evidence and proven hundreds of years before Jesus lived.Please try not to make such utterly silly assertions that only make Christians look really stupid.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Jesus got his Y chromosome from the Roman centurion Pantera.Poor Joseph was so gullible he fell for Mary's excuse, top marks to the chick for quick thinking.Oh the shame of it all.

Well, this also explains how Jesus got his Roman nose. It was miracle that Joseph never had a clue.”HM

This is a Faith/Belief Forum. For you to insinuate that the Creator of all that is seen and unseen couldn't produce a Y Chromosome is ludicrous at best. The Virgin Birth is a faith based event, to be sure. There is no natural explanation for it.Gen wants us to focus on the humanity of Jesus and there is no proof as to how He originated or if He even lived. I maintain that the emotional passion concerning this man by others..be it intense love or intense hatred....is itself a valid assertion for His existence or at the very least the power of His legend.Few figures in History arouse such ambivalent emotions in others.

But OP said: So I was a askings a question about Jesus.BTW, Phat, if you insist that: Then why do Christians, especially Creationists, continuously attempt to validate their faiths and beliefs on their perceptions of scientific facts and principles? If Christianity is purely a matter of faith and belief then Christians don't need science to make it more so, do they?”HM

Hmmm... intense emotional passion does not equate to evidence of existence in any way shape or form. Hindus intensely oppose Muslims in certain sections of the world but this opposition does not lend credibility to either world view.I suspect there are few who have hatred of the person Jesus. Some may have a contempt for superstition - especially when it cross-cuts into the political or legal sphere.However I like to remind myself to "Hate the superstition but Love the superstitionist".Second you are aware of this this emotional conflict because you live in a Christian/liberal democracy in transition. If there ever is a Muslim/liberal democracy I suspect you will find an equivalent conflict concerning the person of Mohammad.This struggle is the result of the times the intersection of ancient antiquated beliefs and a more modern science based world view. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

Another component of this intense emotional conflict you mentioned is the religious motif of: "believe in this unobservable unknowable unsubstantiated idea or bad things will happen to you for an eternity!" Well I can't force myself to believe stuff like that. Such spiritual threats are psychologically damaging and unhealthily; perpetuation of such a threat is immoral.BTW, the psychology behind this religious superstitious idea is the same psychology that is behind the common chain letter and it is powerfully effective on some people.

And yet Gen blatantly dodged my question of if Jesus would have approved of what the Israelites did to the people of Jerico. The humanity of Jesus? Gen did say that Jesus was with god the father when he commanded the Israelites to kill every man, woman, and child (even those 1 and 2 year olds... I'm sure they were out raping other 1 and 2 year olds...) except for the virgin girls implying that Jesus approved of the murderous acts.So, please, I still haven't forgotten your pathetic attempt to rationalize genocide. Want to talk about the humanity of Jesus? Tell Gen to stop dodging my question and address the issue directly.Would Jesus have approved of the Israelites running their swords through 1 year olds and pregnant women of the city of Jerico?

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!