How much beer had you had to drink when typing this question?
Jesus didn't turn water into beer. It was wine and not only wine, but the very best of all wines. And not grape juice either.Is it true that Jesus did turn water into beer after 4 attempts?
He didn't say He did but I'll tell you what, when you see Him and whether you believe you will or not you will, so why don't you ask Him? I'm sure he'll be as amused at the question as you are. Is it true that Jesus did turn water into beer after 4 attempts?
No that was the devil and that happened after he said out your name in a dream.
:O i wish i could turn water into beer :P
Nope.
stop eating ****!
yep, he was a lush who could not handle his beer
I don't really like beer that much. hmm Prefer wine.. red wine.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Is it true that Jesus Christ turned dead people into zombies?
Not quite...he turned perfectly normal people into dumb@rses.Is it true that Jesus Christ turned dead people into zombies?
When Jesus died on the Cross bodies were resurrected, yes, and great numbers saw them and knew that they had been dead. However, these resurrected bodies were not decayed or decaying. They did not act like zombies either. They did not go around trying to kill people, they just wanted to see their saviour. Jesus was not a zombie either and He rose from the dead and then ascended into Heaven right in from of all these people. They knew it was Jesus because they knew Him but also He showed them the holes in his hands and feet and side. It is thrilling to read about and know that He is coming back at the rapture. Man that is REALLY gonna be amazing.Is it true that Jesus Christ turned dead people into zombies?
NO!
GOD Bless YA,
Chicago Bob. (Imasinner)
Please pray for our Country and Our President (DAILY)
There is more Joy in JESUS in 24 hours, Than there is in the World in 365 Days. I have tried them both.(ME TO)
R.A. Torrey.
No.
Zombies feed on flesh - they didn't.
Zombies bite people to convert them.
Zombies can't talk or even walk properly - they're mindless with only one thing on their mind, and that's food.
Zombies don't walk on water.
Yep -- which pretty much makes ';Dawn of the Dead'; the unofficial sequel to ';The Passion of the Christ';...
Not only can he turn other dead people into zombies, but he can turn himself into a zombie!!! Yayyyyy !!!!!
yes, much in the same way when a doctor uses his powers called a defibrillator to turn dead people into zombies too.
I'm reading PATIENT ZERO right now where Middle Eastern terrorists are trying to unleash zombies in the USA.
Yes. Just read your Gospels, and you shall see.
Although it's not clear whether Jesus did this or God the Father, if one is making a trinitarian distinction.
Not that I've heard...
Oh, you mean that he resurrected people?
I believe he did. After all, he IS God... so he absolutely should be able to :P
Only Lazarus and himself.
That's what the bible says. Although, I doubt the zombies were the brain eating type.
Jesus: The Jewish Sky Zombie
Yes.
No.
ah...no...this is what our public schools are spitting out? that is sad.
no that's what separates him from the normal undead he can't infect others
yes my son peace be with you
When Jesus died on the Cross bodies were resurrected, yes, and great numbers saw them and knew that they had been dead. However, these resurrected bodies were not decayed or decaying. They did not act like zombies either. They did not go around trying to kill people, they just wanted to see their saviour. Jesus was not a zombie either and He rose from the dead and then ascended into Heaven right in from of all these people. They knew it was Jesus because they knew Him but also He showed them the holes in his hands and feet and side. It is thrilling to read about and know that He is coming back at the rapture. Man that is REALLY gonna be amazing.Is it true that Jesus Christ turned dead people into zombies?
NO!
GOD Bless YA,
Chicago Bob. (Imasinner)
Please pray for our Country and Our President (DAILY)
There is more Joy in JESUS in 24 hours, Than there is in the World in 365 Days. I have tried them both.(ME TO)
R.A. Torrey.
No.
Zombies feed on flesh - they didn't.
Zombies bite people to convert them.
Zombies can't talk or even walk properly - they're mindless with only one thing on their mind, and that's food.
Zombies don't walk on water.
Yep -- which pretty much makes ';Dawn of the Dead'; the unofficial sequel to ';The Passion of the Christ';...
Not only can he turn other dead people into zombies, but he can turn himself into a zombie!!! Yayyyyy !!!!!
yes, much in the same way when a doctor uses his powers called a defibrillator to turn dead people into zombies too.
I'm reading PATIENT ZERO right now where Middle Eastern terrorists are trying to unleash zombies in the USA.
Yes. Just read your Gospels, and you shall see.
Although it's not clear whether Jesus did this or God the Father, if one is making a trinitarian distinction.
Not that I've heard...
Oh, you mean that he resurrected people?
I believe he did. After all, he IS God... so he absolutely should be able to :P
Only Lazarus and himself.
That's what the bible says. Although, I doubt the zombies were the brain eating type.
Jesus: The Jewish Sky Zombie
Yes.
No.
ah...no...this is what our public schools are spitting out? that is sad.
no that's what separates him from the normal undead he can't infect others
yes my son peace be with you
Did the prophecy of Hollywood & Rome came true: Jesus is a white guy with blue eye = Russians in Israel?
The next Jesus will be born into a Russian family in IsraelDid the prophecy of Hollywood %26amp; Rome came true: Jesus is a white guy with blue eye = Russians in Israel?
only one is or was neededDid the prophecy of Hollywood %26amp; Rome came true: Jesus is a white guy with blue eye = Russians in Israel?
don't be so Euro-centric, Jesus was a latino one of the good guy, didn't you know the mexicans were headed back east then you know to the land of milk and honey, that's why they come here now. we are the new land of Milk and Honey, or if the libs have it there way soy milk and whole wheat
You're confused.
NO.
What?loreal hair
only one is or was neededDid the prophecy of Hollywood %26amp; Rome came true: Jesus is a white guy with blue eye = Russians in Israel?
don't be so Euro-centric, Jesus was a latino one of the good guy, didn't you know the mexicans were headed back east then you know to the land of milk and honey, that's why they come here now. we are the new land of Milk and Honey, or if the libs have it there way soy milk and whole wheat
You're confused.
NO.
What?
Why won't you heathens accept the one true God, Jesus Christ? And, moreover, why do you hate him?
Let's face it, I should be worshiped. At least I'm real.Why won't you heathens accept the one true God, Jesus Christ? And, moreover, why do you hate him?
Only an illogical christian would make such a dumb statement. You don't even realize that jesus is not the big fairy itself. Moreover, why are you so ignorant that you do not realize that people who do not believe in your fairy friend cannot possibly hate it. It is people like you with attitudes like yours that we dislike so intensely.Why won't you heathens accept the one true God, Jesus Christ? And, moreover, why do you hate him?
I don't know of any of my esteemed atheist colleagues hate your god or jesus, since god does not exist and jesus was nothing more than a persuasive orator that could convince the masses of all they wanted to hear (sorta like hitler). It is zealots like you that evoke extreme dislike in us, because regardless of our view of the world we still are affected by your theist law in the USA.
Trust me... leave us alone and we will reciprocate in kind.
I don't hate Jesus, I just don't think he was divine. I think he had some valuable things to say in the sermon on the mount. It would be lovely if Christians focused more on that that on Leviticus and Genesis.
And right back at ya. Do you accept Buddhist principles? If not, why not?
there is no proof of god. and the ';proof'; you people do claim to have, fails in the face of logic, reason and science. therefor, if jesus existed, wich all proof says he did not, then it would be impossible for him to be god, since god does not exist.
we cannot hate something that does not exist, but the hate, pain and injustices we have witnessed leads us to beleive it is dangerous, and not love based, and we dispise the very idea of it.
I think the major problem here has actually been highlighted by the hateful, spitting comments that have been returned to your question - along with the wording of your question itself.
Your question seems to be accusational towards all who do not believe as you do - firstly by calling us ';you heathens';, and then by accusing us of hating a figure in your belief system (ie Jesus Christ).
How would you feel if we were to call you ';you God Botherers'; or something of the like?
Like breeds like - as you would put it ';Do unto others as you would have them do unto you';. If you want respect - treat others with respect. If you want people to respect your views - respect theirs.
You believe the Christian ';version'; of God to be the one true version - whist every other belief system is shouting the same thing.
So how do I explain it...think of it this way.
You are one of 3 people sitting in a darkened room with a candle burning in the centre. Each person is looking at the candle from a different angle, and describes what they see...whose description is correct?
One person calls it a candle, one a wax stick, another a source of light - whose ';name'; is more correct? Is there only ';one true answer';?
Similarly there are millions of people in this world, all looking at this idea of God. Each person sees and experiences this idea from a different perspective. Each person calls this idea a different name - some use the word ';God'; some ';Goddess'; some ';Allah'; some ';the divine being'; - who is more correct?
It is ridiculous to argue about words, ideas and definitions. Instead of concentrating on the difference - how about focusing on the similarities - after all, we are all looking at the same candle!
Nothing logical about being a christian. Your name is a paradox.
Why do so many self-righteous christians feel the need to force their narrow and bigoted views down everyone's throat?
Why can't you accept that some people are more enlightened and realise that there is no god?
The 10 Commandments State ';Do not worship a false God before me.'; These were handed down to Moses long before Jesus came along.
Only Christians have taken it upon themselves to replace God with Jesus, on account of some illogical triad thing that makes absolutely no sense.
The other original religions of Abraham (Judaism and Islam) worship God, but have not place Jesus ahead (or on parallel) with him. I believe this is the correct thing to do.
I believe Jesus may have existed and was a great man, but a God he is not, nor do I believe our creator intends for us to worship him. Otherwise, there would've been some kind of footnote in the 10 Commandments.
The workings of men created this worship of Jesus. It is their folly that misleads you.
Jesus is ';NOT'; God.. he even said so himself
really you are blind.. sorry
from your own bible brother.. read! open your eyes
John 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me
If you call me a heathen, I'm not even going to read the rest of your question. Why do most fundies insist on name-calling? I find that very anti-Christian. And why do you hate heathens? At least we have a sense of humor.
Because you touch yourself at night.
Now close the Bible, get off this website, and go EDUCATE YOURSELF. At the very least, hang out in the ';Science and Mathematics'; section of the site, instead of the Religion section.
Atheists do not hate. Christians and Muslims hate. Religion is a blight on the possibility of a perfect world.
Evidence. With your God, or any other, there is no evidence.
I don't hate him either. I just think he's a fairy tale.
We won't accept because we don't find the proof to be substantial enough. And we don't hate that which we don't believe exists....
Because I like the way the word 'heathen' sounds. There is a thin line between love and hate, and my eyesight isn't what it used to be. I didn't see the line.
If you really want to know about these things and are not just carrying on then watch this video. It is extremely informative:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=鈥?/a>
Use that ';logic'; when watching...
Why should I hate a character of fiction?
And why should I accept him???
I also don't accept or hate ET.....
What gives you the right to call people heathens just because they don't believe the same as you? Stop trying to stir up crap and go thump a bible somewhere else.
dude this world will accept God then people like you start living the bible and not acting like correction officers for Christ.
Why won't you heathens accept the one true God, Jesus Christ?
-Get on you're knees and worship Hannah, you foul creature!
why do you hate him?
-It's a mutual hatred, he doesn't love me.
Troll, troll, troll your boat, gently down the streeeeeeam...
I don't typically hate things which do not exist.
For the same reason I hate Shylock from ';The Merchant of Venice';...
Don't hate him. You have to believe in something to hate it!
Learn some subtlety, troll.
Now class, for the 30 millionth time, YOU CAN NOT HATE WHAT DOES NOT EXIST.
Your fault.
You don't live up to your name.
If you were logical, then you would not be a Christian
I don't hate dead people
i want some proof of true-y-ness
Only an illogical christian would make such a dumb statement. You don't even realize that jesus is not the big fairy itself. Moreover, why are you so ignorant that you do not realize that people who do not believe in your fairy friend cannot possibly hate it. It is people like you with attitudes like yours that we dislike so intensely.Why won't you heathens accept the one true God, Jesus Christ? And, moreover, why do you hate him?
I don't know of any of my esteemed atheist colleagues hate your god or jesus, since god does not exist and jesus was nothing more than a persuasive orator that could convince the masses of all they wanted to hear (sorta like hitler). It is zealots like you that evoke extreme dislike in us, because regardless of our view of the world we still are affected by your theist law in the USA.
Trust me... leave us alone and we will reciprocate in kind.
I don't hate Jesus, I just don't think he was divine. I think he had some valuable things to say in the sermon on the mount. It would be lovely if Christians focused more on that that on Leviticus and Genesis.
And right back at ya. Do you accept Buddhist principles? If not, why not?
there is no proof of god. and the ';proof'; you people do claim to have, fails in the face of logic, reason and science. therefor, if jesus existed, wich all proof says he did not, then it would be impossible for him to be god, since god does not exist.
we cannot hate something that does not exist, but the hate, pain and injustices we have witnessed leads us to beleive it is dangerous, and not love based, and we dispise the very idea of it.
I think the major problem here has actually been highlighted by the hateful, spitting comments that have been returned to your question - along with the wording of your question itself.
Your question seems to be accusational towards all who do not believe as you do - firstly by calling us ';you heathens';, and then by accusing us of hating a figure in your belief system (ie Jesus Christ).
How would you feel if we were to call you ';you God Botherers'; or something of the like?
Like breeds like - as you would put it ';Do unto others as you would have them do unto you';. If you want respect - treat others with respect. If you want people to respect your views - respect theirs.
You believe the Christian ';version'; of God to be the one true version - whist every other belief system is shouting the same thing.
So how do I explain it...think of it this way.
You are one of 3 people sitting in a darkened room with a candle burning in the centre. Each person is looking at the candle from a different angle, and describes what they see...whose description is correct?
One person calls it a candle, one a wax stick, another a source of light - whose ';name'; is more correct? Is there only ';one true answer';?
Similarly there are millions of people in this world, all looking at this idea of God. Each person sees and experiences this idea from a different perspective. Each person calls this idea a different name - some use the word ';God'; some ';Goddess'; some ';Allah'; some ';the divine being'; - who is more correct?
It is ridiculous to argue about words, ideas and definitions. Instead of concentrating on the difference - how about focusing on the similarities - after all, we are all looking at the same candle!
Nothing logical about being a christian. Your name is a paradox.
Why do so many self-righteous christians feel the need to force their narrow and bigoted views down everyone's throat?
Why can't you accept that some people are more enlightened and realise that there is no god?
The 10 Commandments State ';Do not worship a false God before me.'; These were handed down to Moses long before Jesus came along.
Only Christians have taken it upon themselves to replace God with Jesus, on account of some illogical triad thing that makes absolutely no sense.
The other original religions of Abraham (Judaism and Islam) worship God, but have not place Jesus ahead (or on parallel) with him. I believe this is the correct thing to do.
I believe Jesus may have existed and was a great man, but a God he is not, nor do I believe our creator intends for us to worship him. Otherwise, there would've been some kind of footnote in the 10 Commandments.
The workings of men created this worship of Jesus. It is their folly that misleads you.
Jesus is ';NOT'; God.. he even said so himself
really you are blind.. sorry
from your own bible brother.. read! open your eyes
John 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me
If you call me a heathen, I'm not even going to read the rest of your question. Why do most fundies insist on name-calling? I find that very anti-Christian. And why do you hate heathens? At least we have a sense of humor.
Because you touch yourself at night.
Now close the Bible, get off this website, and go EDUCATE YOURSELF. At the very least, hang out in the ';Science and Mathematics'; section of the site, instead of the Religion section.
Atheists do not hate. Christians and Muslims hate. Religion is a blight on the possibility of a perfect world.
Evidence. With your God, or any other, there is no evidence.
I don't hate him either. I just think he's a fairy tale.
We won't accept because we don't find the proof to be substantial enough. And we don't hate that which we don't believe exists....
Because I like the way the word 'heathen' sounds. There is a thin line between love and hate, and my eyesight isn't what it used to be. I didn't see the line.
If you really want to know about these things and are not just carrying on then watch this video. It is extremely informative:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=鈥?/a>
Use that ';logic'; when watching...
Why should I hate a character of fiction?
And why should I accept him???
I also don't accept or hate ET.....
What gives you the right to call people heathens just because they don't believe the same as you? Stop trying to stir up crap and go thump a bible somewhere else.
dude this world will accept God then people like you start living the bible and not acting like correction officers for Christ.
Why won't you heathens accept the one true God, Jesus Christ?
-Get on you're knees and worship Hannah, you foul creature!
why do you hate him?
-It's a mutual hatred, he doesn't love me.
Troll, troll, troll your boat, gently down the streeeeeeam...
I don't typically hate things which do not exist.
For the same reason I hate Shylock from ';The Merchant of Venice';...
Don't hate him. You have to believe in something to hate it!
Learn some subtlety, troll.
Now class, for the 30 millionth time, YOU CAN NOT HATE WHAT DOES NOT EXIST.
Your fault.
You don't live up to your name.
If you were logical, then you would not be a Christian
I don't hate dead people
i want some proof of true-y-ness
4 TRUE BELIEVERS N JESUS CHRIST ONLY.IF U HAD A DREAM OF DA WORLD ENDING,DO U BELIEVE IT IS A WARNING 4RM GOD?
I HAD ONE, AND OF COURSE SATAN COUNTERACTED MY BELIEF.4 TRUE BELIEVERS N JESUS CHRIST ONLY.IF U HAD A DREAM OF DA WORLD ENDING,DO U BELIEVE IT IS A WARNING 4RM GOD?
It could be, but maybe you are just too anxious about it.
It could be, but maybe you are just too anxious about it.
Christians, where in the bible does Jesus claim to BE the one and true god?
I read somewhere that Jesus never claimed to be unequivocally god, that he always said he was the son of god, etc.
I just want to know if this is true.Christians, where in the bible does Jesus claim to BE the one and true god?
Here you go, clear as can be in John 10:30
John 10:25-30
25Jesus answered, ';I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[d]; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. 30I and the Father are one.';Christians, where in the bible does Jesus claim to BE the one and true god?
I'd like to add that, if Jesus is indeed ';one'; with God in a literal sense, then you may wish to revise the thought of a trinity to one including many more gods as part of the same whole. This is because Jesus said that his followers were all ';one'; with each other, and wanted them to be in union with him and God. - John 17:21-24
Well... Jesus is the Son of God.
John 3:16
';For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.';
1 Corinthians 1:9
';God, who has called you into fellowship with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, is faithful.';
1 John 4:15
';If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God.';
I hope that helped. (=
When He forgives sins
When He accepts worship
When He commands the powers of nature
When He raises the dead
When He cures lepers by an act of His will
When He rises from trhe dead
Jesus spent His entire public life doing things only God can do. Is it necessary that He say ';I AM GOD'; in words? Actions speak louder than words.
First - here's the background that all of the Jews knew.
1. God met Abraham as three men.
Genesis 18:1-2 The LORD appeared to Abraham near the great trees of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day. (2) Abraham looked up and saw three men standing nearby. When he saw them, he hurried from the entrance of his tent to meet them and bowed low to the ground.
2. God says His name is ';I AM';.
Exodus 3:13-14 Moses said to God, ';Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?'; (14) God said to Moses, ';I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'';
Now, here is Jesus' claim:
John 8:57-58 The Jews therefore said to him, ';You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?'; (58) Jesus said to them, ';Most certainly, I tell you, before Abraham came into existence, I AM.';
Their response?
John 8:59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.
Why? They did not believe him and they knew this law.
Leviticus 24:16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.
P.S. When Jesus is saying He is one with the Father, He is talking relationally. Jesus is one with the Father in more than one way.
i don't recall him saying he was God specifically. You need to understand the trinity to understand Jesus's role. and since you know about it all thats left is understanding it
It is called the trinity.
The most difficult thing about the Christian concept of the Trinity is that there is no way to adequately explain it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely greater than we are, therefore we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God, that Jesus is God, and that the Holy Spirit is God. The Bible also teaches that there is only one God. Though we can understand some facts about the relationship of the different persons of the Trinity to one another, ultimately, it is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this does not mean it is not true or not based on the teachings of the Bible.
Keep in mind when studying this subject that the word ';Trinity'; is not used in Scripture. This is a term that is used to attempt to describe the triune God, the fact that there are three coexistent, co-eternal persons that make up God. Understand that this is NOT in any way suggesting three Gods. The Trinity is one God made up of three persons. There is nothing wrong with using the term ';Trinity'; even though the word is not found in the Bible. It is shorter to say the word ';Trinity'; than to say ';three coexistent, co-eternal persons making up one God.'; If this presents a problem to you, consider this: the word grandfather is not used in the Bible either. Yet, we know there were grandfathers in the Bible. Abraham was the grandfather of Jacob. What should be of real importance is that the concept that is represented by the word ';Trinity'; does exist in Scripture. With the introduction out of the way, Bible verses will be given in discussion of the Trinity.
1) There is one God: Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5.
2) The Trinity consists of three Persons: Genesis 1:1; 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8; 48:16; 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17; Matt 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14. In the passages in the Old Testament, a knowledge of Hebrew is helpful. In Genesis 1:1, the plural noun ';Elohim'; is used. In Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for ';us'; is used. That ';Elohim'; and ';us'; refer to more than two is without question. In English, we only have two forms, singular and plural. In Hebrew, you have three forms: singular, dual, and plural. Dual is for two ONLY. In Hebrew, the dual form is used for things that come in pairs like eyes, ears, and hands. The word ';Elohim'; and the pronoun ';us'; are plural forms—definitely more than two—and must be referring to three or more, in this case Father, Son, Holy Spirit.
In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking. Matthew 3:16-17 describes the event of Jesus' baptism. Seen in this is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are examples of three distinct persons in the Trinity.
3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages: In the Old Testament, ';LORD'; is distinguished from ';Lord'; (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The LORD has a Son (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4). Spirit is distinguished from the “LORD” (Numbers 27:18) and from ';God'; (Psalm 51:10-12). God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9). In the New Testament John 14:16-17, Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit. This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit. Consider also all of the other times in the Gospels where Jesus speaks to the Father. Was He speaking to Himself? No. He spoke to another person in the Trinity—the Father.
4) Each member of the Trinity is God: The Father is God: John 6:27; Romans 1:7; 1 Peter 1:2. The Son is God: John 1:1, 14; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8; 1 John 5:20. The Holy Spirit is God: Acts 5:3-4; 1 Corinthians 3:16. (The One who indwells is the Holy Spirit - Romans 8:9; John 14:16-17; Acts 2:1-4).
5) The subordination within the Trinity: Scripture shows that the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Father and the Son, and the Son is subordinate to the Father. This is an internal relationship and does not deny the deity of any person of the Trinity. This is simply an area which our finite minds cannot understand concerning the infinite God. Concerning the Son see: Luke 22:42; John 5:36; John 20:21; 1 John 4:14. Concerning the Holy Spirit see: John 14:16; 14:26; 15:26; 16:7 and especially John 16:13-14.
6) The tasks of the individual members of the Trinity: The Father is the ultimate source or cause of the universe (1 Corinthians 8:6; Revelation 4:11); divine revelation (Revelation 1:1); salvation (John 3:16-17); and Jesus' human works (John 5:17; 14:10). The Father initiates all of these things.
The Son is the agent throug
he didn't say that at all in fact the said the exact opposite.....Matthew 4:10 (Jesus said it himself worship only God) and John 20:17 (you can't be your own father or God).........I hope I helped take care
You are right, and in passages such as John 17:3 he made it quite clear that ';the only true God'; was someone other than himself.
God is always capitalized
He said it in a variety of ways in the Gospels. Try John 3:16
He did.
I and my Father are One, He who has seen me has seen The Father.
John 14:7-10
7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on, you know him, and have seen him.'; 8 Philip said to him, ';Lord, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us.'; 9 Jesus said to him, ';Have I been with you such a long time, and do you not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father. How do you say, 'Show us the Father?' 10 Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father living in me does his works.
I just want to know if this is true.Christians, where in the bible does Jesus claim to BE the one and true god?
Here you go, clear as can be in John 10:30
John 10:25-30
25Jesus answered, ';I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[d]; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. 30I and the Father are one.';Christians, where in the bible does Jesus claim to BE the one and true god?
I'd like to add that, if Jesus is indeed ';one'; with God in a literal sense, then you may wish to revise the thought of a trinity to one including many more gods as part of the same whole. This is because Jesus said that his followers were all ';one'; with each other, and wanted them to be in union with him and God. - John 17:21-24
Well... Jesus is the Son of God.
John 3:16
';For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.';
1 Corinthians 1:9
';God, who has called you into fellowship with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, is faithful.';
1 John 4:15
';If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God.';
I hope that helped. (=
When He forgives sins
When He accepts worship
When He commands the powers of nature
When He raises the dead
When He cures lepers by an act of His will
When He rises from trhe dead
Jesus spent His entire public life doing things only God can do. Is it necessary that He say ';I AM GOD'; in words? Actions speak louder than words.
First - here's the background that all of the Jews knew.
1. God met Abraham as three men.
Genesis 18:1-2 The LORD appeared to Abraham near the great trees of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day. (2) Abraham looked up and saw three men standing nearby. When he saw them, he hurried from the entrance of his tent to meet them and bowed low to the ground.
2. God says His name is ';I AM';.
Exodus 3:13-14 Moses said to God, ';Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?'; (14) God said to Moses, ';I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'';
Now, here is Jesus' claim:
John 8:57-58 The Jews therefore said to him, ';You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?'; (58) Jesus said to them, ';Most certainly, I tell you, before Abraham came into existence, I AM.';
Their response?
John 8:59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.
Why? They did not believe him and they knew this law.
Leviticus 24:16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.
P.S. When Jesus is saying He is one with the Father, He is talking relationally. Jesus is one with the Father in more than one way.
i don't recall him saying he was God specifically. You need to understand the trinity to understand Jesus's role. and since you know about it all thats left is understanding it
It is called the trinity.
The most difficult thing about the Christian concept of the Trinity is that there is no way to adequately explain it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely greater than we are, therefore we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God, that Jesus is God, and that the Holy Spirit is God. The Bible also teaches that there is only one God. Though we can understand some facts about the relationship of the different persons of the Trinity to one another, ultimately, it is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this does not mean it is not true or not based on the teachings of the Bible.
Keep in mind when studying this subject that the word ';Trinity'; is not used in Scripture. This is a term that is used to attempt to describe the triune God, the fact that there are three coexistent, co-eternal persons that make up God. Understand that this is NOT in any way suggesting three Gods. The Trinity is one God made up of three persons. There is nothing wrong with using the term ';Trinity'; even though the word is not found in the Bible. It is shorter to say the word ';Trinity'; than to say ';three coexistent, co-eternal persons making up one God.'; If this presents a problem to you, consider this: the word grandfather is not used in the Bible either. Yet, we know there were grandfathers in the Bible. Abraham was the grandfather of Jacob. What should be of real importance is that the concept that is represented by the word ';Trinity'; does exist in Scripture. With the introduction out of the way, Bible verses will be given in discussion of the Trinity.
1) There is one God: Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5.
2) The Trinity consists of three Persons: Genesis 1:1; 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8; 48:16; 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17; Matt 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14. In the passages in the Old Testament, a knowledge of Hebrew is helpful. In Genesis 1:1, the plural noun ';Elohim'; is used. In Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for ';us'; is used. That ';Elohim'; and ';us'; refer to more than two is without question. In English, we only have two forms, singular and plural. In Hebrew, you have three forms: singular, dual, and plural. Dual is for two ONLY. In Hebrew, the dual form is used for things that come in pairs like eyes, ears, and hands. The word ';Elohim'; and the pronoun ';us'; are plural forms—definitely more than two—and must be referring to three or more, in this case Father, Son, Holy Spirit.
In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking. Matthew 3:16-17 describes the event of Jesus' baptism. Seen in this is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are examples of three distinct persons in the Trinity.
3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages: In the Old Testament, ';LORD'; is distinguished from ';Lord'; (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The LORD has a Son (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4). Spirit is distinguished from the “LORD” (Numbers 27:18) and from ';God'; (Psalm 51:10-12). God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9). In the New Testament John 14:16-17, Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit. This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit. Consider also all of the other times in the Gospels where Jesus speaks to the Father. Was He speaking to Himself? No. He spoke to another person in the Trinity—the Father.
4) Each member of the Trinity is God: The Father is God: John 6:27; Romans 1:7; 1 Peter 1:2. The Son is God: John 1:1, 14; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8; 1 John 5:20. The Holy Spirit is God: Acts 5:3-4; 1 Corinthians 3:16. (The One who indwells is the Holy Spirit - Romans 8:9; John 14:16-17; Acts 2:1-4).
5) The subordination within the Trinity: Scripture shows that the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Father and the Son, and the Son is subordinate to the Father. This is an internal relationship and does not deny the deity of any person of the Trinity. This is simply an area which our finite minds cannot understand concerning the infinite God. Concerning the Son see: Luke 22:42; John 5:36; John 20:21; 1 John 4:14. Concerning the Holy Spirit see: John 14:16; 14:26; 15:26; 16:7 and especially John 16:13-14.
6) The tasks of the individual members of the Trinity: The Father is the ultimate source or cause of the universe (1 Corinthians 8:6; Revelation 4:11); divine revelation (Revelation 1:1); salvation (John 3:16-17); and Jesus' human works (John 5:17; 14:10). The Father initiates all of these things.
The Son is the agent throug
he didn't say that at all in fact the said the exact opposite.....Matthew 4:10 (Jesus said it himself worship only God) and John 20:17 (you can't be your own father or God).........I hope I helped take care
You are right, and in passages such as John 17:3 he made it quite clear that ';the only true God'; was someone other than himself.
God is always capitalized
He said it in a variety of ways in the Gospels. Try John 3:16
He did.
I and my Father are One, He who has seen me has seen The Father.
John 14:7-10
7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on, you know him, and have seen him.'; 8 Philip said to him, ';Lord, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us.'; 9 Jesus said to him, ';Have I been with you such a long time, and do you not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father. How do you say, 'Show us the Father?' 10 Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father living in me does his works.
Is it true that Obama covered up a picture of Jesus during a speech he made?
I just heard something about that, but didn't catch the whole story.
Anyone hear anything about that?Is it true that Obama covered up a picture of Jesus during a speech he made?
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/ar鈥?/a>Is it true that Obama covered up a picture of Jesus during a speech he made?
i didn't vote for Obama, but I have to laugh at all this worthless propaganda. He's affluent, Ivy League-educated, Christian, married with kids, and fulfills the presidential status quo with the exception of being 100% white. Get over it. He's in the White House for the next few years. Stop making up stuff that has nothing to do with politics and focus on something that matters. You should be grateful you have a president who respects all faith.
No, it's not exactly true. He gave a speech at a Catholic university (Georgetown) and asked them to have a plain background. The people who allowed him to speak there set up the background but they had to cover 3 letters that they used to represent the name of Jesus above the background in order to suit our ';Christian'; President.
Not quite. He was speaking at Georgetown University in Gaston Hall. He asked them to cover up any symbols with flags or drapes to give a plain background that he always used in speeches. One of the symbols there is a monogram that represents Jesus, IHS. They covered it up too.
Yes someone asked the question earlier and there was a link to a news article about it.
But let's think for a moment. Do you remember when Mike Huckabee was running for president and he was interviewed, I think in his home, and people were pitching fits because there was a ';cross'; behind him? It turned out to be a bookshelf, where two corners met.
If President Obama had made a speech with a picture of Jesus behind him, what do you think would have happened? Would people have listened to anything he said or pitched a fit over his ';pushing Jesus on everyone';??
I'm not saying it's right that he did it. I'm not saying it's wrong that he did it. What I'm saying is....can we stop going crazy about things like this and work together to figure out how to pull our country out of this mess!!!???
First of all there is no true picture of Holy Jesus is available, and pretending any image as Jesus is disgrace to Holy personality of Jesus.
No he didn't, stop making crap up. I heard he had Michelle holding up a sign behind him with a picture of Jesus that had a big red X across his face.
Sounds like fear mongering from the religious right, who will do anything to discredit a Democrat.
I heard he sacrificed a virgin puppy to Satan on the day of his inauguration.
No. But I wouldn't be surprised.
I highly, highly doubt that.
Seriously, what would be the damn point?
Anyone hear anything about that?Is it true that Obama covered up a picture of Jesus during a speech he made?
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/ar鈥?/a>Is it true that Obama covered up a picture of Jesus during a speech he made?
i didn't vote for Obama, but I have to laugh at all this worthless propaganda. He's affluent, Ivy League-educated, Christian, married with kids, and fulfills the presidential status quo with the exception of being 100% white. Get over it. He's in the White House for the next few years. Stop making up stuff that has nothing to do with politics and focus on something that matters. You should be grateful you have a president who respects all faith.
No, it's not exactly true. He gave a speech at a Catholic university (Georgetown) and asked them to have a plain background. The people who allowed him to speak there set up the background but they had to cover 3 letters that they used to represent the name of Jesus above the background in order to suit our ';Christian'; President.
Not quite. He was speaking at Georgetown University in Gaston Hall. He asked them to cover up any symbols with flags or drapes to give a plain background that he always used in speeches. One of the symbols there is a monogram that represents Jesus, IHS. They covered it up too.
Yes someone asked the question earlier and there was a link to a news article about it.
But let's think for a moment. Do you remember when Mike Huckabee was running for president and he was interviewed, I think in his home, and people were pitching fits because there was a ';cross'; behind him? It turned out to be a bookshelf, where two corners met.
If President Obama had made a speech with a picture of Jesus behind him, what do you think would have happened? Would people have listened to anything he said or pitched a fit over his ';pushing Jesus on everyone';??
I'm not saying it's right that he did it. I'm not saying it's wrong that he did it. What I'm saying is....can we stop going crazy about things like this and work together to figure out how to pull our country out of this mess!!!???
First of all there is no true picture of Holy Jesus is available, and pretending any image as Jesus is disgrace to Holy personality of Jesus.
No he didn't, stop making crap up. I heard he had Michelle holding up a sign behind him with a picture of Jesus that had a big red X across his face.
Sounds like fear mongering from the religious right, who will do anything to discredit a Democrat.
I heard he sacrificed a virgin puppy to Satan on the day of his inauguration.
No. But I wouldn't be surprised.
I highly, highly doubt that.
Seriously, what would be the damn point?
Hi, is it true that when Jesus was born, there were religions already on earth?
The reason I am asking is because, those religions that Jesus found on earth may have been false religions, and if they were false, is it not possible that they may exist even today. If they exist today, how can we find them and even avoid them?Hi, is it true that when Jesus was born, there were religions already on earth?
Of course. Religion has always existed in human history, but the face of it has changed. In the life of Jesus, modern religion was still around in Judaism and Zoroastrianism (monotheism, heaven and hell, a perfect god, etc.). I wouldn't go so far as to avoid them, however.Hi, is it true that when Jesus was born, there were religions already on earth?
There is no historical evidence to support the idea that 'Jesus' actually existed in the time and place that the bible claims he did.
The Romans were meticulous record keepers - but not one word of him anywhere.
There were plenty of religions prior to 'Jesus' supposed birth - many of them were plagiarized heavily by the bible.
'Jesus' wasn't the first 'son of god' to be born of a virgin, do miracles, get betrayed, killed, and then rise on the third day. That came from much older myths.
There were also dozens of people claiming to be 'the messiah' that the old testament 'prophesied'. Heck - the Jewish people (who wrote the old testament) are still waiting for the real one to show up.
All religions are false.
They are a tool used by the strong to control the weak.
The jesus of the so called nt never existed as an actual person, in fact the name itself is less than 400 years old.
There are 2 true religions established by the Creator - Noachidism and Judaism, which pre-date xtianity by several thousand years. There were numerous other ancient religions, as stated in some of the other posts.
There are 16 crucified ';saviors';. The jesus of the so called nt is a compilation of 3 actual men that were crucified on the eve of Passover spanning about 150 years. Pilate was not responsible for any of these men's deaths. Many of the events of the nt never took place. The ';miracles'; of the nt had been done by previous pagan godmen.
Jews don't believe that any of these supposed godmen were Messiah simply because they did not meet the Scriptural requirements for Messiah.
Are you kidding??? Christianity is simply an extension of those religions flourishing beforehand. I suggest you do some serious research and read the publication listed below. This book will give you references to other books of the same content.
Yes indeed there have been ,and still are to this day,religions that are far more older than Christianity which is as well one of the youngest of all the religions ,and still in its infancy ,and like many other religions have been corrupted by men all down through the ages.The one spiritual religion like Buddhism are more pure than many of the other religions.As an occultist and mystic it is my job to create a climate of hope and expectancy for the coming World Teacher who is as well the most eldest within the human evolution,and His name is Maitreya,and he is the one who now stands in the office of the Christ for the next 2056 years.As a teacher Maitreya is here to teach mankind the art of self discovery ,and self realization ,and to inspire mankind to create a new world wide civilization that will be based on brotherly love,sharing, and a new and very powerful global spirituality that will take all humanity through the gates of initiation and to thus take the first step in becoming divine.
LMAO what, false religions?
What makes you think Christianity is a true religion?
Jesus only found Judaism, because he was a JEW.
I can't believe you're actually asking this question. Really, I'm actually baffled.
Judaism
Christianity
Islam
Buddhism
Sikhism
Hinduism
Wicca
Religions existed before even Judaism. Have you never heard of the Pagan gods and goddesses?
Zeus, Hera, Athena, Artemis, Aphrodite, Hermes, Hephaestus, Ares, Poseidon, Apollo, Pan, Hades, Demeter, Dionysus, Hestia, Ceres, Diana, Juno, Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Venus, Neptune. Vulcan, Vesta, Seth, Horus, Ra, Hathor, Sekhmet, Osiris, Isis, Thoth, Anubis, Ma'at, Amun, Bastet, Geb, Nut, Odin, Thor, Freya, Freyr, Tyr, Loki, Heimdall, Skadi, Frigga...
Just to name a few.
I don't even know what to think anymore, I've actually just lost all hope for humanity.
No effing duh. Lets list them shall we?
1. Judaism
2. Buddhism
3. Hinduism
4. Greek mythology
5. Roman mythology
6. Babylonian mythology
7. Egyptian mythology
etc...
Yes, of course, many of them and they were no more or less false than Christianity. Actually Christianity and the story of Jesus is far from original. Many of the religions that ';Jesus found on Earth'; not only still exist, but make infinitely more sense than does Christianity.
You might also note that Jesus was born a Jew, lived as a Jew, and died a Jew. He never heard the word Christianity.
Try reading a real book once in a while!
Well, primarily in Jesus' day it was Judaism as the primary religion. But some people worshiped inanimate objects, like the golden calf that Aaron made for the people. I think Buddhists or Hindus worship inanimate objects, not sure though. I've never understood that myself-why on earth would anyone worship something that they made with their own hands? lol
Just what makes a religion false? Just because it is not yours or you do not believe in it doesn't make it false. Did not Jesus say that many would come professing a false faith and many are christian. Note Jesus said after him were false religions. He also said that those who Claim before him were thieves and robbers.
It truly amazes me that whatever cave you were raised in, you emerged this morning fully conversant with the English language and the ability to use the internet. Wow! And they never told you, while you were being raised in this cave, that religion has been around for quite a few thousands of years? Talk about being in the dark!
The Jesus story is not unique or original to Christianity. Christ is actually a pagan word in reference to the sun. ie as in Mithra Christos. The NT is c90% Mithra Christos scripture, word for word. Mithra was a male dominated religion based on blood sacrifice. Hence all the references to double edged swords, the full amour of god, and the drinking of blood and eating the body of christ. All are from Mithra Christos, nothing to do with the dark ages invented religion called Christianity.
The following list of beliefs all share the Jesus story and they all predate Christianity.
Chrishna of Hundostan
Budha sakia of India
Salivahana of Bermuda
Zyulis, or SHule, alos Osiris and Orus of Egypt
Odin of the Scandinavians
Crite of Chaldea
Zoroaster and Mithra of Persia
Baal and Taut ';The only Begotton of God'; of Phoeneica,
indra of Tibet
Bali of Afghanistan
Jao of Nepal
Wittoba of the Bilingonese
Thammiz of Syria
Atys of Phrygia
Xamolxis of Thrace
Zoar of the Boanzes
Adad of Assyria
Deva Ta, and Sammanocadan of Siam
Aklcides of Thebes
Mikado of the Sintroos
Beddru of Japan
Hesus or Eros, and Bremrillah, and the Druids
Thor, son of Odin, af the Gauls
Cadmus of Greece
Hil and Feta of the Mandaites
Gentaut and Quexalcote of Mexico,
Universal Monarch of the SIbyls,
Ishcy of the Island of Formosa
Divine teracher of Plato
Homy One of Xaca,
Fohi and Tien of China
Adonis, son of the virgin lo of Greece,
Ixion and Quirinus of Rome.
Prometheus of Caucasus
Practicing Shaman... quantum physics rocks
Jesus was born to a family that practiced Judaism. At the same, time, the Romans had their own religion. The Egyptians had their own religion. The Chinese had their own religion. Get a history book. Try to catch up.
Your question shows a lack of education.
There were gods and religions long before Jesus allegedly showed up.His is no more believable than any of the others.
Not only were there other religions, but Christianity is based heavily on them.
ofc but most religions in the time of jesus were very violent and jesus was 2 stoned 2 fight so they allowed him and his sect 2 comtinue their brainwashing :)
since the first man walked up wright there has been something to
worship even if was just fire or A image.history dates back hundreds
of years befor Christ and no they would have not survived and for
me and you only the American Indian is the nearest thing.
yes: christianity is actually one of the newer religions on earth
yes those false religions do exist today.. christianity is a good example of one
Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism.
um seeing as how most of the bible was written before jesus was born... obviously
Jesus was Jewish.
Who gives a flying *****?
Its 2009
Yes.
yes it was
Yes, Jesus was Jewish. not a joke. hope it helps.
yes, look at the information on the link.
Of course, but try ';avoiding'; 80% of the population of the planet and see how that works out for you. Why would you assume that religions that were here BEFORE Jesus are false?
Seek to know God better and better and then ask God to lead you and then you can not be mislead. Take this to God and ask God to lead and teach you now and always. Ask not, get not.
take care.
They were absolutely false religions, because the truth is that JESUS is the only way to heaven.
Jesus said there is ONE NARROW way to heaven, and that is only by JESUS. And then Jesus said there is a broad way, which is every other way, and those all lead to eternal torment in hell.
Jesus is God, and Jesus loves you so very much! :D
The truth about Jesus is that the only way to be saved and to get into heaven and avoid being sent to eternal hell, is by believing in Jesus for salvation, believing in faith alone that Jesus, who is God, died on the cross for all our sins as FULL PAYMENT for all our sins, and then Jesus rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Believe in Jesus alone for salvation, and you will be in heaven, no matter what!
Salvation is a FREE GIFT that happens in a split second when you believe in Jesus alone to save you! It is impossible to lose or ';leave'; salvation (John 6:39-40, John 10:28, 1 John 5:13).
Please pray now: ';Jesus, I believe that You died on the cross to pay for my sins and that You rose from the dead, and I thank You for eternal life!'; You will be in heaven with Him forever when you die! :D
Here's the thing... they are ALL false.
Of course. Religion has always existed in human history, but the face of it has changed. In the life of Jesus, modern religion was still around in Judaism and Zoroastrianism (monotheism, heaven and hell, a perfect god, etc.). I wouldn't go so far as to avoid them, however.Hi, is it true that when Jesus was born, there were religions already on earth?
There is no historical evidence to support the idea that 'Jesus' actually existed in the time and place that the bible claims he did.
The Romans were meticulous record keepers - but not one word of him anywhere.
There were plenty of religions prior to 'Jesus' supposed birth - many of them were plagiarized heavily by the bible.
'Jesus' wasn't the first 'son of god' to be born of a virgin, do miracles, get betrayed, killed, and then rise on the third day. That came from much older myths.
There were also dozens of people claiming to be 'the messiah' that the old testament 'prophesied'. Heck - the Jewish people (who wrote the old testament) are still waiting for the real one to show up.
All religions are false.
They are a tool used by the strong to control the weak.
The jesus of the so called nt never existed as an actual person, in fact the name itself is less than 400 years old.
There are 2 true religions established by the Creator - Noachidism and Judaism, which pre-date xtianity by several thousand years. There were numerous other ancient religions, as stated in some of the other posts.
There are 16 crucified ';saviors';. The jesus of the so called nt is a compilation of 3 actual men that were crucified on the eve of Passover spanning about 150 years. Pilate was not responsible for any of these men's deaths. Many of the events of the nt never took place. The ';miracles'; of the nt had been done by previous pagan godmen.
Jews don't believe that any of these supposed godmen were Messiah simply because they did not meet the Scriptural requirements for Messiah.
Are you kidding??? Christianity is simply an extension of those religions flourishing beforehand. I suggest you do some serious research and read the publication listed below. This book will give you references to other books of the same content.
Yes indeed there have been ,and still are to this day,religions that are far more older than Christianity which is as well one of the youngest of all the religions ,and still in its infancy ,and like many other religions have been corrupted by men all down through the ages.The one spiritual religion like Buddhism are more pure than many of the other religions.As an occultist and mystic it is my job to create a climate of hope and expectancy for the coming World Teacher who is as well the most eldest within the human evolution,and His name is Maitreya,and he is the one who now stands in the office of the Christ for the next 2056 years.As a teacher Maitreya is here to teach mankind the art of self discovery ,and self realization ,and to inspire mankind to create a new world wide civilization that will be based on brotherly love,sharing, and a new and very powerful global spirituality that will take all humanity through the gates of initiation and to thus take the first step in becoming divine.
LMAO what, false religions?
What makes you think Christianity is a true religion?
Jesus only found Judaism, because he was a JEW.
I can't believe you're actually asking this question. Really, I'm actually baffled.
Judaism
Christianity
Islam
Buddhism
Sikhism
Hinduism
Wicca
Religions existed before even Judaism. Have you never heard of the Pagan gods and goddesses?
Zeus, Hera, Athena, Artemis, Aphrodite, Hermes, Hephaestus, Ares, Poseidon, Apollo, Pan, Hades, Demeter, Dionysus, Hestia, Ceres, Diana, Juno, Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Venus, Neptune. Vulcan, Vesta, Seth, Horus, Ra, Hathor, Sekhmet, Osiris, Isis, Thoth, Anubis, Ma'at, Amun, Bastet, Geb, Nut, Odin, Thor, Freya, Freyr, Tyr, Loki, Heimdall, Skadi, Frigga...
Just to name a few.
I don't even know what to think anymore, I've actually just lost all hope for humanity.
No effing duh. Lets list them shall we?
1. Judaism
2. Buddhism
3. Hinduism
4. Greek mythology
5. Roman mythology
6. Babylonian mythology
7. Egyptian mythology
etc...
Yes, of course, many of them and they were no more or less false than Christianity. Actually Christianity and the story of Jesus is far from original. Many of the religions that ';Jesus found on Earth'; not only still exist, but make infinitely more sense than does Christianity.
You might also note that Jesus was born a Jew, lived as a Jew, and died a Jew. He never heard the word Christianity.
Try reading a real book once in a while!
Well, primarily in Jesus' day it was Judaism as the primary religion. But some people worshiped inanimate objects, like the golden calf that Aaron made for the people. I think Buddhists or Hindus worship inanimate objects, not sure though. I've never understood that myself-why on earth would anyone worship something that they made with their own hands? lol
Just what makes a religion false? Just because it is not yours or you do not believe in it doesn't make it false. Did not Jesus say that many would come professing a false faith and many are christian. Note Jesus said after him were false religions. He also said that those who Claim before him were thieves and robbers.
It truly amazes me that whatever cave you were raised in, you emerged this morning fully conversant with the English language and the ability to use the internet. Wow! And they never told you, while you were being raised in this cave, that religion has been around for quite a few thousands of years? Talk about being in the dark!
The Jesus story is not unique or original to Christianity. Christ is actually a pagan word in reference to the sun. ie as in Mithra Christos. The NT is c90% Mithra Christos scripture, word for word. Mithra was a male dominated religion based on blood sacrifice. Hence all the references to double edged swords, the full amour of god, and the drinking of blood and eating the body of christ. All are from Mithra Christos, nothing to do with the dark ages invented religion called Christianity.
The following list of beliefs all share the Jesus story and they all predate Christianity.
Chrishna of Hundostan
Budha sakia of India
Salivahana of Bermuda
Zyulis, or SHule, alos Osiris and Orus of Egypt
Odin of the Scandinavians
Crite of Chaldea
Zoroaster and Mithra of Persia
Baal and Taut ';The only Begotton of God'; of Phoeneica,
indra of Tibet
Bali of Afghanistan
Jao of Nepal
Wittoba of the Bilingonese
Thammiz of Syria
Atys of Phrygia
Xamolxis of Thrace
Zoar of the Boanzes
Adad of Assyria
Deva Ta, and Sammanocadan of Siam
Aklcides of Thebes
Mikado of the Sintroos
Beddru of Japan
Hesus or Eros, and Bremrillah, and the Druids
Thor, son of Odin, af the Gauls
Cadmus of Greece
Hil and Feta of the Mandaites
Gentaut and Quexalcote of Mexico,
Universal Monarch of the SIbyls,
Ishcy of the Island of Formosa
Divine teracher of Plato
Homy One of Xaca,
Fohi and Tien of China
Adonis, son of the virgin lo of Greece,
Ixion and Quirinus of Rome.
Prometheus of Caucasus
Practicing Shaman... quantum physics rocks
Jesus was born to a family that practiced Judaism. At the same, time, the Romans had their own religion. The Egyptians had their own religion. The Chinese had their own religion. Get a history book. Try to catch up.
Your question shows a lack of education.
There were gods and religions long before Jesus allegedly showed up.His is no more believable than any of the others.
Not only were there other religions, but Christianity is based heavily on them.
ofc but most religions in the time of jesus were very violent and jesus was 2 stoned 2 fight so they allowed him and his sect 2 comtinue their brainwashing :)
since the first man walked up wright there has been something to
worship even if was just fire or A image.history dates back hundreds
of years befor Christ and no they would have not survived and for
me and you only the American Indian is the nearest thing.
yes: christianity is actually one of the newer religions on earth
yes those false religions do exist today.. christianity is a good example of one
Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism.
um seeing as how most of the bible was written before jesus was born... obviously
Jesus was Jewish.
Who gives a flying *****?
Its 2009
Yes.
yes it was
Yes, Jesus was Jewish. not a joke. hope it helps.
yes, look at the information on the link.
Of course, but try ';avoiding'; 80% of the population of the planet and see how that works out for you. Why would you assume that religions that were here BEFORE Jesus are false?
Seek to know God better and better and then ask God to lead you and then you can not be mislead. Take this to God and ask God to lead and teach you now and always. Ask not, get not.
take care.
They were absolutely false religions, because the truth is that JESUS is the only way to heaven.
Jesus said there is ONE NARROW way to heaven, and that is only by JESUS. And then Jesus said there is a broad way, which is every other way, and those all lead to eternal torment in hell.
Jesus is God, and Jesus loves you so very much! :D
The truth about Jesus is that the only way to be saved and to get into heaven and avoid being sent to eternal hell, is by believing in Jesus for salvation, believing in faith alone that Jesus, who is God, died on the cross for all our sins as FULL PAYMENT for all our sins, and then Jesus rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Believe in Jesus alone for salvation, and you will be in heaven, no matter what!
Salvation is a FREE GIFT that happens in a split second when you believe in Jesus alone to save you! It is impossible to lose or ';leave'; salvation (John 6:39-40, John 10:28, 1 John 5:13).
Please pray now: ';Jesus, I believe that You died on the cross to pay for my sins and that You rose from the dead, and I thank You for eternal life!'; You will be in heaven with Him forever when you die! :D
Here's the thing... they are ALL false.
Is it really true Jesus Christ was married?
No one will ever know. It does make for an interesting story though.Is it really true Jesus Christ was married?
No, it's not true. We have good evidence that Jesus was not married in the four biographies known as the gospels, none of which mentions a marriage. But even more pointedly, we have this teaching in Matt 19:
The disciples said to him, ';If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.';
Jesus replied, ';Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.';
Jesus and most of his disciples ';renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven.'; Why? Matthew 8:20: Jesus replied, ';Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.';
Cheers,
BruceIs it really true Jesus Christ was married?
No, it is not because Jesus is God in the flesh. God claims to be our Father, and He will never marry His children. The only wife He has is called ';Israel';, as written in the Old Testament.
Metaphorically he was married to the church, literally he was single.
no. but in Islam, we are told that when Jesus returns for his 2nd time.. he will then marry and have children and live a long life here on earth and die a natural death.. some 40odd years later..
If Jesus was married he sure spent a lot of time traveling around with 12 other men.
Jesus was a homosexual zombie
No an absolute no.
No...
If there had been a Mrs. God, don't you think it just might have been mentioned in the Bible?
You will never know :P
no, jesus isn't realloreal hair
No, it's not true. We have good evidence that Jesus was not married in the four biographies known as the gospels, none of which mentions a marriage. But even more pointedly, we have this teaching in Matt 19:
The disciples said to him, ';If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.';
Jesus replied, ';Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.';
Jesus and most of his disciples ';renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven.'; Why? Matthew 8:20: Jesus replied, ';Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.';
Cheers,
BruceIs it really true Jesus Christ was married?
No, it is not because Jesus is God in the flesh. God claims to be our Father, and He will never marry His children. The only wife He has is called ';Israel';, as written in the Old Testament.
Metaphorically he was married to the church, literally he was single.
no. but in Islam, we are told that when Jesus returns for his 2nd time.. he will then marry and have children and live a long life here on earth and die a natural death.. some 40odd years later..
If Jesus was married he sure spent a lot of time traveling around with 12 other men.
Jesus was a homosexual zombie
No an absolute no.
No...
If there had been a Mrs. God, don't you think it just might have been mentioned in the Bible?
You will never know :P
no, jesus isn't real
Some christians think others simply ';reject' god and jesus,as if thet think its true but choose not to believe?
what about people who genuinly believe another faith for the same reasons you truley believe your faith is correct. or what about athiests who disbelieve because they see it as both improbable and irrational that god exists at all. do you dought the genuiness of what other think?Some christians think others simply ';reject' god and jesus,as if thet think its true but choose not to believe?
The people who do that cannot imagine anything beyond their own beliefs, so anyone who doesn't conform is deliberately wrong in their eyes.
@Liberal Asskicker - try to understand this (and I know it's difficult for you)...I examined the claims and beliefs of your religion and found them to be ridiculous. I did not choose to believe in them...therefore, I chose not to believe.
Get it now?Some christians think others simply ';reject' god and jesus,as if thet think its true but choose not to believe?
I'm with you on the first sentence. I've spent a lot of time around fundies, and they're viewpoint is what we call ';solipsistic.';
Here's a definition:
solipsism - the view confining reality to oneself and one's experiences.
In other words, they can't even comprehend the idea that most people don't even bother thinking about their god, much less rejecting it.
As a Christian I can only tell you the truth. If you fail to believe that's your hard luck. When The Lord sends you to hell He will remind you of every occasion you were told about Him and rejected the truth.
no one is born a believer. every person is born an atheist. I never rejected god because I never believed in him.
If you ';choose'; not to believe, does that mean you were born a believer and then changed your mind?
They think we're lying.
The people who do that cannot imagine anything beyond their own beliefs, so anyone who doesn't conform is deliberately wrong in their eyes.
@Liberal Asskicker - try to understand this (and I know it's difficult for you)...I examined the claims and beliefs of your religion and found them to be ridiculous. I did not choose to believe in them...therefore, I chose not to believe.
Get it now?Some christians think others simply ';reject' god and jesus,as if thet think its true but choose not to believe?
I'm with you on the first sentence. I've spent a lot of time around fundies, and they're viewpoint is what we call ';solipsistic.';
Here's a definition:
solipsism - the view confining reality to oneself and one's experiences.
In other words, they can't even comprehend the idea that most people don't even bother thinking about their god, much less rejecting it.
As a Christian I can only tell you the truth. If you fail to believe that's your hard luck. When The Lord sends you to hell He will remind you of every occasion you were told about Him and rejected the truth.
no one is born a believer. every person is born an atheist. I never rejected god because I never believed in him.
If you ';choose'; not to believe, does that mean you were born a believer and then changed your mind?
They think we're lying.
Is it true Gods family all gang up on Jesus and crucify him?
CRUCIFY HIM, CRUCIFY HIM. It is his gift. So I can get into heaven. As all the Christians run to grab their hammers.
Something wrong with this gift of grace Christians? Is it true Gods family all gang up on Jesus and crucify him?
Jews killed Jesus. Duh!Is it true Gods family all gang up on Jesus and crucify him?
The ones who crucified him were animals with very little control over their animal drives.Today it is different but not much different.If he appeared today,and did the things he did before,he would simply be crucified in a more modern way.Via the Media.
Christ did not choose to die.He was murdered.
The lie ';Christ died to save us';is what people like to tell themselves to alleviate their sense of being guilty for being a part of a society that murdered an embodiment of love.Rationalization.
According to the bible ,,,,yes, but also according to the bible it is okay to kill as long as you are doing it in gods name.
Aside from the obvious hyperbole, the only thing wrong with this gift is that some people refuse to accept it.
No, it isn't true. It is true that Christ submitted Himself to the cross. I find your question unnecessarily offensive.
Something wrong with this gift of grace Christians? Is it true Gods family all gang up on Jesus and crucify him?
Jews killed Jesus. Duh!Is it true Gods family all gang up on Jesus and crucify him?
The ones who crucified him were animals with very little control over their animal drives.Today it is different but not much different.If he appeared today,and did the things he did before,he would simply be crucified in a more modern way.Via the Media.
Christ did not choose to die.He was murdered.
The lie ';Christ died to save us';is what people like to tell themselves to alleviate their sense of being guilty for being a part of a society that murdered an embodiment of love.Rationalization.
According to the bible ,,,,yes, but also according to the bible it is okay to kill as long as you are doing it in gods name.
Aside from the obvious hyperbole, the only thing wrong with this gift is that some people refuse to accept it.
No, it isn't true. It is true that Christ submitted Himself to the cross. I find your question unnecessarily offensive.
Is it true that the ancient historian Josephus' account of Jesus was a forgery?
Please provide a link or literature to show if this accusation of forgery is true or false. Thank you.Is it true that the ancient historian Josephus' account of Jesus was a forgery?
Apparently Josephus mentioned Jesus of Nazareth twice in The Antiquities of the Jews, but the first reference,Testimonium Flavianum, has been discounted as a forgery since the 1750's (though the assumption it IS a forgery has lately become questioned).
The second shorter reference, about Jesus and his brother James, has been more recently disputed.
For something like the full scoop, read the Wikipedia article:Is it true that the ancient historian Josephus' account of Jesus was a forgery?
While being a popular historian Josephus isn't always credible. Many of his writings have been found to be contradictory or there was no possible way he could have been present to witness what he wrote about. Most notably for the latter, his writings about Masada.
In his ';Testimonium Flavianum'; Josephus wrote:
';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 Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused of men by 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. One 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.';
Josephus was a Jew who was captured during the siege of Jotapata by Vespasian.
And if you look over the passage, there's truth in it. I really doubt that it's a forgery of any sort.
My understanding is, the Josephus account consists of one or two lines. One line of which may have been ';doctored'; by early Christians, to suit their purposes. I heard this subject come up on Milt Rosenberg's show on WGN radio, in Chicago. The interviews were with several divinity Phd's from Chicago area colleges. I know Milt's program has an archive of past shows.
Josephus never mentioned Jesus.
Apparently Josephus mentioned Jesus of Nazareth twice in The Antiquities of the Jews, but the first reference,Testimonium Flavianum, has been discounted as a forgery since the 1750's (though the assumption it IS a forgery has lately become questioned).
The second shorter reference, about Jesus and his brother James, has been more recently disputed.
For something like the full scoop, read the Wikipedia article:Is it true that the ancient historian Josephus' account of Jesus was a forgery?
While being a popular historian Josephus isn't always credible. Many of his writings have been found to be contradictory or there was no possible way he could have been present to witness what he wrote about. Most notably for the latter, his writings about Masada.
In his ';Testimonium Flavianum'; Josephus wrote:
';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 Greeks. He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused of men by 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. One 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.';
Josephus was a Jew who was captured during the siege of Jotapata by Vespasian.
And if you look over the passage, there's truth in it. I really doubt that it's a forgery of any sort.
My understanding is, the Josephus account consists of one or two lines. One line of which may have been ';doctored'; by early Christians, to suit their purposes. I heard this subject come up on Milt Rosenberg's show on WGN radio, in Chicago. The interviews were with several divinity Phd's from Chicago area colleges. I know Milt's program has an archive of past shows.
Josephus never mentioned Jesus.
Is it true that jesus was a bald-headed, one-eyed, one-testicled man with a limp leg?
No? how do you know? have you seen him? why do all these pepole depict jesus as a white brunnet guy. i think my description of him is more accurate. do you agree?Is it true that jesus was a bald-headed, one-eyed, one-testicled man with a limp leg?
Yes, he only had one testicle. That's why he only came once in 2000 years.Is it true that jesus was a bald-headed, one-eyed, one-testicled man with a limp leg?
No mate, he was however a nomadic arab and far from white. There was likely a spiritual leader or prophet of that name at large 2000 years ago in the present day battle ground known sometimes as the holy land. His immaculate conception and who his father was I leave you to decide.
no one knows what jesus looks like. Anyone who says they do may think they know but they don't know. I get what you are going for here, and while it is rather unlikely that in that era a bald one eyed mam would not be followed, it is likely that he does not look the way he was depicted.
Because some Bibles have pictures, too. :)
Joking aside, you've got a good point. If Jesus came back, how would we know that it was him and not some drunk college student who knew a few magic tricks? If someone stood in the middle of a park on a bench, or something, and had a megaphone as he declared ';I'm Jesus Christ. Come with me';, my first reaction would probably be to laugh. It would be very hard to prove that, because apparently religious figures are too modest to declare themselves blatantly to us.
No the Bible describes him he was God in the flesh and yes i have seen him not physically but through my faith. I will see him someday! BTW he was Jewish so he at least had to have a tan. No i do not agree with your description of him honestly i think its gross and stupid.
I can tell you one thing: he couldn't have been one-testicled, or that would have been reason for the Pharisees to exclude him from the temple. Since he clearly went into the temple, he must have had two testicles.
I take offense on the depiction of my younger brother. But you have the free will to believe what ever it is you wish to believe. Won't be condemned to a eternal Hell either. So no it is not true and I saw him a dinner yesterday.
dude your an idiot. one day you'll say dang....wish i wouldn't have made fun of jesus on yahoo answers......as your flesh burns off of your bones for an entirity. actually you won't have time to think that cuz you'll be thinking.....AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Nope. Jesus had to be a perfect sacrifice.
Therefore He had to be a perfect physical specimen.
The bible does not contain one physical description of him, yet, he has influenced man-kind than any other person who ever lived.
The Bible says that Jesus was not someone that would be mistaken for a person from a palace. He wasn't handsome, but He was the perfect Lamb. He would have both eyes and legs.
The people who followed him thought he was cute.
If he was like you describe, he wouldn't have made it as far as he got.
.
Blasphemy.
no because the bible descirbes who jesus was.
I find it doubtful he even existed, so my answer would be ';I don't know, nor do I care.';
No.
Sigh..............I dont think I'll even bother
LMAO omg lol well i hope not..
ummm no.
Yes, he only had one testicle. That's why he only came once in 2000 years.Is it true that jesus was a bald-headed, one-eyed, one-testicled man with a limp leg?
No mate, he was however a nomadic arab and far from white. There was likely a spiritual leader or prophet of that name at large 2000 years ago in the present day battle ground known sometimes as the holy land. His immaculate conception and who his father was I leave you to decide.
no one knows what jesus looks like. Anyone who says they do may think they know but they don't know. I get what you are going for here, and while it is rather unlikely that in that era a bald one eyed mam would not be followed, it is likely that he does not look the way he was depicted.
Because some Bibles have pictures, too. :)
Joking aside, you've got a good point. If Jesus came back, how would we know that it was him and not some drunk college student who knew a few magic tricks? If someone stood in the middle of a park on a bench, or something, and had a megaphone as he declared ';I'm Jesus Christ. Come with me';, my first reaction would probably be to laugh. It would be very hard to prove that, because apparently religious figures are too modest to declare themselves blatantly to us.
No the Bible describes him he was God in the flesh and yes i have seen him not physically but through my faith. I will see him someday! BTW he was Jewish so he at least had to have a tan. No i do not agree with your description of him honestly i think its gross and stupid.
I can tell you one thing: he couldn't have been one-testicled, or that would have been reason for the Pharisees to exclude him from the temple. Since he clearly went into the temple, he must have had two testicles.
I take offense on the depiction of my younger brother. But you have the free will to believe what ever it is you wish to believe. Won't be condemned to a eternal Hell either. So no it is not true and I saw him a dinner yesterday.
dude your an idiot. one day you'll say dang....wish i wouldn't have made fun of jesus on yahoo answers......as your flesh burns off of your bones for an entirity. actually you won't have time to think that cuz you'll be thinking.....AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Nope. Jesus had to be a perfect sacrifice.
Therefore He had to be a perfect physical specimen.
The bible does not contain one physical description of him, yet, he has influenced man-kind than any other person who ever lived.
The Bible says that Jesus was not someone that would be mistaken for a person from a palace. He wasn't handsome, but He was the perfect Lamb. He would have both eyes and legs.
The people who followed him thought he was cute.
If he was like you describe, he wouldn't have made it as far as he got.
.
Blasphemy.
no because the bible descirbes who jesus was.
I find it doubtful he even existed, so my answer would be ';I don't know, nor do I care.';
No.
Sigh..............I dont think I'll even bother
LMAO omg lol well i hope not..
ummm no.
Is it true that jesus was a bald-headed, one-eyed, one-testicled man with a limp leg?
No? how do you know? have you seen him? why do all these pepole depict jesus as a white brunnet guy. i think my description of him is more accurate. do you agree?Is it true that jesus was a bald-headed, one-eyed, one-testicled man with a limp leg?
Yes, he only had one testicle. That's why he only came once in 2000 years.Is it true that jesus was a bald-headed, one-eyed, one-testicled man with a limp leg?
No mate, he was however a nomadic arab and far from white. There was likely a spiritual leader or prophet of that name at large 2000 years ago in the present day battle ground known sometimes as the holy land. His immaculate conception and who his father was I leave you to decide.
no one knows what jesus looks like. Anyone who says they do may think they know but they don't know. I get what you are going for here, and while it is rather unlikely that in that era a bald one eyed mam would not be followed, it is likely that he does not look the way he was depicted.
Because some Bibles have pictures, too. :)
Joking aside, you've got a good point. If Jesus came back, how would we know that it was him and not some drunk college student who knew a few magic tricks? If someone stood in the middle of a park on a bench, or something, and had a megaphone as he declared ';I'm Jesus Christ. Come with me';, my first reaction would probably be to laugh. It would be very hard to prove that, because apparently religious figures are too modest to declare themselves blatantly to us.
No the Bible describes him he was God in the flesh and yes i have seen him not physically but through my faith. I will see him someday! BTW he was Jewish so he at least had to have a tan. No i do not agree with your description of him honestly i think its gross and stupid.
I can tell you one thing: he couldn't have been one-testicled, or that would have been reason for the Pharisees to exclude him from the temple. Since he clearly went into the temple, he must have had two testicles.
I take offense on the depiction of my younger brother. But you have the free will to believe what ever it is you wish to believe. Won't be condemned to a eternal Hell either. So no it is not true and I saw him a dinner yesterday.
dude your an idiot. one day you'll say dang....wish i wouldn't have made fun of jesus on yahoo answers......as your flesh burns off of your bones for an entirity. actually you won't have time to think that cuz you'll be thinking.....AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Nope. Jesus had to be a perfect sacrifice.
Therefore He had to be a perfect physical specimen.
The bible does not contain one physical description of him, yet, he has influenced man-kind than any other person who ever lived.
The Bible says that Jesus was not someone that would be mistaken for a person from a palace. He wasn't handsome, but He was the perfect Lamb. He would have both eyes and legs.
The people who followed him thought he was cute.
If he was like you describe, he wouldn't have made it as far as he got.
.
Blasphemy.
no because the bible descirbes who jesus was.
I find it doubtful he even existed, so my answer would be ';I don't know, nor do I care.';
No.
Sigh..............I dont think I'll even bother
LMAO omg lol well i hope not..
ummm no.
Yes, he only had one testicle. That's why he only came once in 2000 years.Is it true that jesus was a bald-headed, one-eyed, one-testicled man with a limp leg?
No mate, he was however a nomadic arab and far from white. There was likely a spiritual leader or prophet of that name at large 2000 years ago in the present day battle ground known sometimes as the holy land. His immaculate conception and who his father was I leave you to decide.
no one knows what jesus looks like. Anyone who says they do may think they know but they don't know. I get what you are going for here, and while it is rather unlikely that in that era a bald one eyed mam would not be followed, it is likely that he does not look the way he was depicted.
Because some Bibles have pictures, too. :)
Joking aside, you've got a good point. If Jesus came back, how would we know that it was him and not some drunk college student who knew a few magic tricks? If someone stood in the middle of a park on a bench, or something, and had a megaphone as he declared ';I'm Jesus Christ. Come with me';, my first reaction would probably be to laugh. It would be very hard to prove that, because apparently religious figures are too modest to declare themselves blatantly to us.
No the Bible describes him he was God in the flesh and yes i have seen him not physically but through my faith. I will see him someday! BTW he was Jewish so he at least had to have a tan. No i do not agree with your description of him honestly i think its gross and stupid.
I can tell you one thing: he couldn't have been one-testicled, or that would have been reason for the Pharisees to exclude him from the temple. Since he clearly went into the temple, he must have had two testicles.
I take offense on the depiction of my younger brother. But you have the free will to believe what ever it is you wish to believe. Won't be condemned to a eternal Hell either. So no it is not true and I saw him a dinner yesterday.
dude your an idiot. one day you'll say dang....wish i wouldn't have made fun of jesus on yahoo answers......as your flesh burns off of your bones for an entirity. actually you won't have time to think that cuz you'll be thinking.....AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Nope. Jesus had to be a perfect sacrifice.
Therefore He had to be a perfect physical specimen.
The bible does not contain one physical description of him, yet, he has influenced man-kind than any other person who ever lived.
The Bible says that Jesus was not someone that would be mistaken for a person from a palace. He wasn't handsome, but He was the perfect Lamb. He would have both eyes and legs.
The people who followed him thought he was cute.
If he was like you describe, he wouldn't have made it as far as he got.
.
Blasphemy.
no because the bible descirbes who jesus was.
I find it doubtful he even existed, so my answer would be ';I don't know, nor do I care.';
No.
Sigh..............I dont think I'll even bother
LMAO omg lol well i hope not..
ummm no.
Is it true that baby Jesus is crying when it rains outside?
He also cries when you touch your wee wee.Is it true that baby Jesus is crying when it rains outside?
Jesus isn't a baby anymore; He grew to be a Jewish Carpenter who died on the cross for our Sins.
If you accept him as your Savior, you will meet him when you leave the earth.Is it true that baby Jesus is crying when it rains outside?
I would say that would be a matter of opinion..... I don't believe so.... but if thats what you choose to believe..... then go for it.
I always thought it was angels! Thunder is when God moves his furniture around. ;-)
go to the religion board and ask this question.
No it's not. And Jesus isn't a baby anymore.
No.
No. Why would he cry when he is giving us rain something we pray for anyway?loreal hair
Jesus isn't a baby anymore; He grew to be a Jewish Carpenter who died on the cross for our Sins.
If you accept him as your Savior, you will meet him when you leave the earth.Is it true that baby Jesus is crying when it rains outside?
I would say that would be a matter of opinion..... I don't believe so.... but if thats what you choose to believe..... then go for it.
I always thought it was angels! Thunder is when God moves his furniture around. ;-)
go to the religion board and ask this question.
No it's not. And Jesus isn't a baby anymore.
No.
No. Why would he cry when he is giving us rain something we pray for anyway?
Is Satan deceiving LDS Mormons since the true restored Church of Jesus Christ is FLDS?
I appreciate your position but you have it the other way around. The FLDS is not prospering and the SLC LDS is prospering. The apostolic authority has continued unabated and the work is moving forward unhindered. By there works shall ye know them and our works speak for us.
Best wishes in your position. I hope you come around some day.Is Satan deceiving LDS Mormons since the true restored Church of Jesus Christ is FLDS?
its only a small possibility that Emma Smith was correct and that sidney rigdon continued the church in righteousness. but highly improbable.
if the true church was swept like a lady in a flood to the utah valley, it was for her protection, against the devouring dragon of revelation. otherwise the church might have been destroyed even as it grew roots.
i dont believe the flds or the rlds are the correct branches of God. but it would not surprise me if the holy ghost of God has his movements among all churches including all the branches of the church.
i think the utah LDS church might be lacking several things, including celestial glory, despite world wide temples but that doesnt mean there would not ever be a revival.
The Glory of the LORD is prophesied to reside on the church whereever it may be. if only priesthood holders magnify their priesthood and (do other things)Is Satan deceiving LDS Mormons since the true restored Church of Jesus Christ is FLDS?
No the LDS church is a Christian Church and so it yours, there was just a split over who to follow once Joseph Smith was martyred.
I tend to side the those who followed Young, but I still think both Churches teach good Christian principals. Christians of all flavors achieve more when they think of what they have in common instead of minutia and doctrinal differences. No Christian is any better than another, nor better than anyone for that matter.
Satan's mission is to deceive Everyone / he wants Lots of company in Hell where he will be. But no one is going to appreciate him or that place once they get there.
Bible says ';I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me'; /Jesus Christ.
You are the ones deceived. FLDS didn't exist until many, many years AFTER the government approved persecution stopped...
The RLDS was the church established by Emma and Sidney Rigdon. However, since they filed bankruptcy several years ago, they are now called the Community of Christ.
Wouldn't it be funny if Satan didn't exist? Ever get Satan to convince you to do something bad? Satan ever make a promise to you. Seems satan uses the same communication as God.. Doesn't Elohim have a better communication method than to speak through someone else?
Meh, you guys don't even have the true priesthood. But the good news is that we will welcome you when you have realized the error of your ways.
FLDS and LDS people are NOT the same. They are two totally and completely unconnected groups.
The true restored church is the LDS church (Mormons).
FLDS is false.
Here's the REAL truth about Satan, my friend:
www.joyofsatan.org
I dont believe any church following Christ is being led by the devil...maybe some churches have the doctrine wrong, but that doesnt mean they are churches of the devil
So my dear since FLDS women actually wear their temple garments sewn in their dress, how do men wear their temple garments?
I am sorry you are deceived.
No. Sorry.
The true Priesthood of God is found only in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
I bet you my true church can beat up your true church.
nope. Satan has more on his mind than the Mormons.
no
LDS, FLDS, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Scientologists, etc., etc.
Just different brands of delusion.
Ok.. you guys have a lizard as a prophet and have to wear ';magic'; underwear when you get married...
You might as well be Scientology!
That definitely seems like the most logical explanation.
All Mormon churches are false and deceived by Satan.
Mormons belong to the devil since 'they' were conceived!! (They are a Cult!) Period!!
Best wishes in your position. I hope you come around some day.Is Satan deceiving LDS Mormons since the true restored Church of Jesus Christ is FLDS?
its only a small possibility that Emma Smith was correct and that sidney rigdon continued the church in righteousness. but highly improbable.
if the true church was swept like a lady in a flood to the utah valley, it was for her protection, against the devouring dragon of revelation. otherwise the church might have been destroyed even as it grew roots.
i dont believe the flds or the rlds are the correct branches of God. but it would not surprise me if the holy ghost of God has his movements among all churches including all the branches of the church.
i think the utah LDS church might be lacking several things, including celestial glory, despite world wide temples but that doesnt mean there would not ever be a revival.
The Glory of the LORD is prophesied to reside on the church whereever it may be. if only priesthood holders magnify their priesthood and (do other things)Is Satan deceiving LDS Mormons since the true restored Church of Jesus Christ is FLDS?
No the LDS church is a Christian Church and so it yours, there was just a split over who to follow once Joseph Smith was martyred.
I tend to side the those who followed Young, but I still think both Churches teach good Christian principals. Christians of all flavors achieve more when they think of what they have in common instead of minutia and doctrinal differences. No Christian is any better than another, nor better than anyone for that matter.
Satan's mission is to deceive Everyone / he wants Lots of company in Hell where he will be. But no one is going to appreciate him or that place once they get there.
Bible says ';I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me'; /Jesus Christ.
You are the ones deceived. FLDS didn't exist until many, many years AFTER the government approved persecution stopped...
The RLDS was the church established by Emma and Sidney Rigdon. However, since they filed bankruptcy several years ago, they are now called the Community of Christ.
Wouldn't it be funny if Satan didn't exist? Ever get Satan to convince you to do something bad? Satan ever make a promise to you. Seems satan uses the same communication as God.. Doesn't Elohim have a better communication method than to speak through someone else?
Meh, you guys don't even have the true priesthood. But the good news is that we will welcome you when you have realized the error of your ways.
FLDS and LDS people are NOT the same. They are two totally and completely unconnected groups.
The true restored church is the LDS church (Mormons).
FLDS is false.
Here's the REAL truth about Satan, my friend:
www.joyofsatan.org
I dont believe any church following Christ is being led by the devil...maybe some churches have the doctrine wrong, but that doesnt mean they are churches of the devil
So my dear since FLDS women actually wear their temple garments sewn in their dress, how do men wear their temple garments?
I am sorry you are deceived.
No. Sorry.
The true Priesthood of God is found only in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
I bet you my true church can beat up your true church.
nope. Satan has more on his mind than the Mormons.
no
LDS, FLDS, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Scientologists, etc., etc.
Just different brands of delusion.
Ok.. you guys have a lizard as a prophet and have to wear ';magic'; underwear when you get married...
You might as well be Scientology!
That definitely seems like the most logical explanation.
All Mormon churches are false and deceived by Satan.
Mormons belong to the devil since 'they' were conceived!! (They are a Cult!) Period!!
Is it true Jesus cured Paul of the hiccups?
by what? giving him a glass of water?Is it true Jesus cured Paul of the hiccups?
historically Paul never met Jesus. Paul was a self appointed to apostle and taught completely different doctrine.Is it true Jesus cured Paul of the hiccups?
Oh yes. He made him laugh.
I'd find it more unusual if Jesus cured Paul of the clap.....
ive never heard that
historically Paul never met Jesus. Paul was a self appointed to apostle and taught completely different doctrine.Is it true Jesus cured Paul of the hiccups?
Oh yes. He made him laugh.
I'd find it more unusual if Jesus cured Paul of the clap.....
ive never heard that
Is it true that according to the BIBLE, Jesus Christ was born in the month of March?
If yes,then what is the significance of the 25th of December?
Sincere answers please...Thanks.Is it true that according to the BIBLE, Jesus Christ was born in the month of March?
25th of December is close to the ancient tradition of celebrating the Winter Solstice
It was chosen to either ';allow pagans to continue their celebrations under the guise of the newly enforced religion'; or to ';wipe out pagan celebrations by replacing them';, depending upon who you ask and who you believe.
If the bible is to be believed, which itself is debatable, but only a scriptural answer usually satisfies a scriptural question, then it is incredibly unlikely that shepherds would have been in the fields with their flocks in December in Judea. The roman census would not have happened in mid-winter.
The concept of a god being born in the spring (a time of renewal and birth in general in our natural world) is probably older than any current religion.
In addition the bible has the following to say about the *year* of jesus' alleged birth:
* Jesus was born during the reign of Caesar Augustus (Luke 2:1). Thus, Jesus was born sometime between 27 B.C. and A.D. 14 (the period in which Augustus was in power)
* Jesus was born after Augustus decreed some kind of census (Luke 2:1). Ancient history indicates there was no singular, empire-wide census ordered by Augustus, but rather a series of censuses taken throughout the empire as Augustus tried to rein in corruption by instituting census counts for tax purposes. This plausibly affirms the context of Luke's account, but sheds no light on the date of Jesus' birth.
* Jesus was born while Quirinius was governor of Syria (Luke 2:2). Luke tells us that the specific census which led Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem was under Quirinius. History reveals that ';Quirinius'; was governor of Syria from 6-9 A.D. and served in a similar capacity (perhaps even as governor) from 12-2 B.C. (especially in the years 3-2 B.C.). This puts Jesus' birth sometime between 12 B.C. and 9 A.D.
* Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod (Matthew 2). This would be ';Herod the Great,'; and history tells us Herod died in 4 B.C. Thus, Jesus was born before 4 B.C.
* The narrative of the ';wise men of the East'; visiting Jesus (after seeing Herod) and then Herod massacring those under 2 years of age in the Bethlehem area when the wise men didn't return to him (Matthew 2) indicates that Jesus was up to 2 years old at the time Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt. This would put Jesus' birth between 6 and 4 B.C. - perhaps as early as 7 B.C.
* Jesus began his active ministry when he was ';about thirty years old'; (Luke 3:23) and did so during the active ministry of John the Baptist (Luke 3). According to Luke, John the Baptist started preaching and baptizing in the 15th year of Tiberius' reign and when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea. This puts Jesus' entry into public life sometime after 27 or 28 A.D. Subtract ';about thirty years'; from that - and you're back to about the time Herod died (4 B.C.), depending on how you define ';about thirty years.';Is it true that according to the BIBLE, Jesus Christ was born in the month of March?
Close...he was actually born in late September, and all can be totally and actually biblically proven. Thank you for this excellent question.
The proof you seek can be found on this website below; just look for the topic, and it is right there for your convenience.
No it is not true that the bible teaches Jesus was born in March.
This is what the bible actually does teach:
Luke 2:8 And there were shepherds living out in the fields near by, keeping watch over their flocks at night.
The rest is mere speculation and inference.
The THEORY goes like this:
The shepherds were keeping watch over their flock in the fields as it was warm, if it were cold they would have been indoors. The reason they were keeping watch at night was because it was lambing season otherwise they would not have been keeping watch at all. Sheep have lambs in the spring ergo Jesus was born in the spring, probably around March/April.
This is a very week argument as:
1. Shepherds tend to their flock all year round.
2. Sheep are out in the fields all year round.
3. Sometimes lambs are born out of season (not that it matters since this verse does not mention lambs being born).
The fact is, we simply don't know when Jesus was born as the first century gospel writers and early christians didn't think it was important to celebrate Christ's birthday, birthday's you see were for pagans, hence the only birthdays mentioned in the bible are Pharaoh's and Herod's.
There is a 1/365.25 chance Jesus was born on 25th December, it really is that arbitrary.
Now the date December 25th was chosen as it was believed that the sun was created on the fourth day (the first being a Sunday making the date the sun was created a Wednesday) It was believed that the sun was created on the day when days start getting longer that is to say the date of the winter solstice (December 21st). We have subsequently discovered that the assumptions made as to the year of Jesus' birth were mistaken hence we now believe Jesus was born somewhere between 10BCE and 4BCE so we changed the dating to ';Before Common Era'; from ';Before Christ'; and a few centuries ago shifted the calendar by 10 days and added a leap second but the year the early christians believed was the year of Jesus' birth is still called 1CE (Common Era) or 1AD (Ano Domini which is Latin for ';in the year of our Lord';.
Hence the 25th December was chosen as the date of the first Wednesday following the winter solstice in 1AD or 1CE.
Since early christians used the date of the supposed creation of the sun and based their date on the observation of lengthening of days, it would naturally coincide with many other pagan celebrations which were also based on the observation of the behaviour of the sun.
There is no reason why this shouldn't have been a deliberate choice to force people into choosing to celebrate the birth of christ or the birth of whatever local deity they were worshipping on that day in an attempt to stamp out the local religions or it could have been an astronomical (and I mean that literally) coincidence.
Not according to the bible but according to fact he was. They chose Dec because all of the other pagan gods had the same date, Mithra, Horus, many others, and Constantine was trying to solidify a political empire.
Bible doesn't say
25th of December was a speculation that Mary was with child during the passover and add 9 months.
not a definite thing and doesn't matter
I do like that we celebrate Jesus birth on the darkest night of the year because He is the light shines in the darkness and the darkness
If you work from the known date when John the Baptist's father was doing his course in the temple, then 6 weeks for Elizabeth to get pregnant, then Mary goes to tell her she's pregnant, it works out that Jesus could have been conceived at the end of December, and thus born in the Autumn, at the Feast of Trumpets.
July as the 1st census was commissioned by Julies Augustus , December25 in the roman pagan day of festivities which was later adapted by Constantine to become christmas
Here are a couple links you might consider. There is some reading involved but, it's worth considering I think. The 25th could possibly be the day the Magi found Jesus (He wasn't an infant). Start with ';Setting the Stage'; He also talks about when Jesus might have been born.
I can't say for sure what it was that lead the Magi but, it at least seems certain something was going on in the stars. The movie is good too, it may be in your local library system for free.
The Bible does not say when Jesus was born
I've never heard march ..... I've heard fall alot October and Nov.. not the spring.
You would think if astrologers were any good they could have come to a consensus as to his personality and been able to tell you when his birthday was .
Sincere answers please...Thanks.Is it true that according to the BIBLE, Jesus Christ was born in the month of March?
25th of December is close to the ancient tradition of celebrating the Winter Solstice
It was chosen to either ';allow pagans to continue their celebrations under the guise of the newly enforced religion'; or to ';wipe out pagan celebrations by replacing them';, depending upon who you ask and who you believe.
If the bible is to be believed, which itself is debatable, but only a scriptural answer usually satisfies a scriptural question, then it is incredibly unlikely that shepherds would have been in the fields with their flocks in December in Judea. The roman census would not have happened in mid-winter.
The concept of a god being born in the spring (a time of renewal and birth in general in our natural world) is probably older than any current religion.
In addition the bible has the following to say about the *year* of jesus' alleged birth:
* Jesus was born during the reign of Caesar Augustus (Luke 2:1). Thus, Jesus was born sometime between 27 B.C. and A.D. 14 (the period in which Augustus was in power)
* Jesus was born after Augustus decreed some kind of census (Luke 2:1). Ancient history indicates there was no singular, empire-wide census ordered by Augustus, but rather a series of censuses taken throughout the empire as Augustus tried to rein in corruption by instituting census counts for tax purposes. This plausibly affirms the context of Luke's account, but sheds no light on the date of Jesus' birth.
* Jesus was born while Quirinius was governor of Syria (Luke 2:2). Luke tells us that the specific census which led Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem was under Quirinius. History reveals that ';Quirinius'; was governor of Syria from 6-9 A.D. and served in a similar capacity (perhaps even as governor) from 12-2 B.C. (especially in the years 3-2 B.C.). This puts Jesus' birth sometime between 12 B.C. and 9 A.D.
* Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod (Matthew 2). This would be ';Herod the Great,'; and history tells us Herod died in 4 B.C. Thus, Jesus was born before 4 B.C.
* The narrative of the ';wise men of the East'; visiting Jesus (after seeing Herod) and then Herod massacring those under 2 years of age in the Bethlehem area when the wise men didn't return to him (Matthew 2) indicates that Jesus was up to 2 years old at the time Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt. This would put Jesus' birth between 6 and 4 B.C. - perhaps as early as 7 B.C.
* Jesus began his active ministry when he was ';about thirty years old'; (Luke 3:23) and did so during the active ministry of John the Baptist (Luke 3). According to Luke, John the Baptist started preaching and baptizing in the 15th year of Tiberius' reign and when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea. This puts Jesus' entry into public life sometime after 27 or 28 A.D. Subtract ';about thirty years'; from that - and you're back to about the time Herod died (4 B.C.), depending on how you define ';about thirty years.';Is it true that according to the BIBLE, Jesus Christ was born in the month of March?
Close...he was actually born in late September, and all can be totally and actually biblically proven. Thank you for this excellent question.
The proof you seek can be found on this website below; just look for the topic, and it is right there for your convenience.
No it is not true that the bible teaches Jesus was born in March.
This is what the bible actually does teach:
Luke 2:8 And there were shepherds living out in the fields near by, keeping watch over their flocks at night.
The rest is mere speculation and inference.
The THEORY goes like this:
The shepherds were keeping watch over their flock in the fields as it was warm, if it were cold they would have been indoors. The reason they were keeping watch at night was because it was lambing season otherwise they would not have been keeping watch at all. Sheep have lambs in the spring ergo Jesus was born in the spring, probably around March/April.
This is a very week argument as:
1. Shepherds tend to their flock all year round.
2. Sheep are out in the fields all year round.
3. Sometimes lambs are born out of season (not that it matters since this verse does not mention lambs being born).
The fact is, we simply don't know when Jesus was born as the first century gospel writers and early christians didn't think it was important to celebrate Christ's birthday, birthday's you see were for pagans, hence the only birthdays mentioned in the bible are Pharaoh's and Herod's.
There is a 1/365.25 chance Jesus was born on 25th December, it really is that arbitrary.
Now the date December 25th was chosen as it was believed that the sun was created on the fourth day (the first being a Sunday making the date the sun was created a Wednesday) It was believed that the sun was created on the day when days start getting longer that is to say the date of the winter solstice (December 21st). We have subsequently discovered that the assumptions made as to the year of Jesus' birth were mistaken hence we now believe Jesus was born somewhere between 10BCE and 4BCE so we changed the dating to ';Before Common Era'; from ';Before Christ'; and a few centuries ago shifted the calendar by 10 days and added a leap second but the year the early christians believed was the year of Jesus' birth is still called 1CE (Common Era) or 1AD (Ano Domini which is Latin for ';in the year of our Lord';.
Hence the 25th December was chosen as the date of the first Wednesday following the winter solstice in 1AD or 1CE.
Since early christians used the date of the supposed creation of the sun and based their date on the observation of lengthening of days, it would naturally coincide with many other pagan celebrations which were also based on the observation of the behaviour of the sun.
There is no reason why this shouldn't have been a deliberate choice to force people into choosing to celebrate the birth of christ or the birth of whatever local deity they were worshipping on that day in an attempt to stamp out the local religions or it could have been an astronomical (and I mean that literally) coincidence.
Not according to the bible but according to fact he was. They chose Dec because all of the other pagan gods had the same date, Mithra, Horus, many others, and Constantine was trying to solidify a political empire.
Bible doesn't say
25th of December was a speculation that Mary was with child during the passover and add 9 months.
not a definite thing and doesn't matter
I do like that we celebrate Jesus birth on the darkest night of the year because He is the light shines in the darkness and the darkness
If you work from the known date when John the Baptist's father was doing his course in the temple, then 6 weeks for Elizabeth to get pregnant, then Mary goes to tell her she's pregnant, it works out that Jesus could have been conceived at the end of December, and thus born in the Autumn, at the Feast of Trumpets.
July as the 1st census was commissioned by Julies Augustus , December25 in the roman pagan day of festivities which was later adapted by Constantine to become christmas
Here are a couple links you might consider. There is some reading involved but, it's worth considering I think. The 25th could possibly be the day the Magi found Jesus (He wasn't an infant). Start with ';Setting the Stage'; He also talks about when Jesus might have been born.
I can't say for sure what it was that lead the Magi but, it at least seems certain something was going on in the stars. The movie is good too, it may be in your local library system for free.
The Bible does not say when Jesus was born
I've never heard march ..... I've heard fall alot October and Nov.. not the spring.
You would think if astrologers were any good they could have come to a consensus as to his personality and been able to tell you when his birthday was .
Isn't it true that Jesus asked to be crucified to satisfy his fetish for crosses?
That's a blatant lie. Jesus asked to be crucified cause he needed a good stretch, that's all. Shame on you for thinking otherwise! :-)
Is it true that Jesus had an alcoholic brother named Barjesus?
Yeah and a sister named barnun.Is it true that Jesus had an alcoholic brother named Barjesus?
I only vaguely remember that name. I think a lot of we Christians need a better sense of humor. God gave us that, too, but they forget.
Is it true that Jesus had an alcoholic brother named Barjesus?
Yes and he still owes me 20 bucks...
That's my bartender
Bottle of Whiskey, please!
No. Provide a link so we can see where you got that
';information,'; please.
pope knows
No, it is not true that Jesus had an alcoholic brother named Barjesus. It talks about Barjesus in the Bible in Acts 13:6 (KJV) where it says that ';And when they had gone through the isle unto Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew, whose name was Barjesus:';
don't forget about GinMary, his sister
No his name was Jose Cuervo, he also had a sister named Mary Jane
Barjesus? You mean bar (son of) Jesus. that is the meaning of bar. As for there being a drunken bar Jesus that is possible, but not necessarily the son of the Jesus christians worship. Jesus was a common name in the first century, like Bob or Sam are today.
Bar Jesus, drunk or sober would not have been the brother of a Jesus.
The answer is no, although Jesus himself was once accused of being a winebibber, which is someone who drinks too much wine. (Matthew 11:19)
Noah was a drunkard though...
Oh is he the guy that owed Jesus $50? Would make the story more interesting wouldn't it?
what hell kind of question is that?
I hope so - I would have more respect for him knowing that!
No, bar jesus was a magician and false prophet in the court of Sergius Paulus when he was procouncil of Cyprus. He was struck blind for interferring with Paul's work. Acts 13:6-12)
Squirrel is that you, you're nuts lol funny and a lil nutty
more than likely
so funny i belive he did have kin . though .
that's just funny right there.
yes he had five brothers
Nope. You must be confused.
No.. it's not true. However if you don't believe me just read Matthew, Mark, Luke and John within the Bible...to start with.
No.
Barjesus simply means '; Son of Jesus';
no ,who the hell told u that. jesus was an only child by old mary thats what made him so unique and special anyone who told u that is CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, I laughed. Seems there's a few Christians here that need to lighten up.... Thanks for the laughs that was just funny.
Peace to you.
no Barjesus was a sorcerer whom the apostles ran into during their ministry...
Act 13:6 And when they had gone through the isle unto Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew, whose name [was] Barjesus:
NO.. even look in the bible
Not to my knowledge.
I only vaguely remember that name. I think a lot of we Christians need a better sense of humor. God gave us that, too, but they forget.
Report Abuse
Is it true that Jesus had an alcoholic brother named Barjesus?
Yes and he still owes me 20 bucks...
That's my bartender
Bottle of Whiskey, please!
No. Provide a link so we can see where you got that
';information,'; please.
pope knows
No, it is not true that Jesus had an alcoholic brother named Barjesus. It talks about Barjesus in the Bible in Acts 13:6 (KJV) where it says that ';And when they had gone through the isle unto Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew, whose name was Barjesus:';
don't forget about GinMary, his sister
No his name was Jose Cuervo, he also had a sister named Mary Jane
Barjesus? You mean bar (son of) Jesus. that is the meaning of bar. As for there being a drunken bar Jesus that is possible, but not necessarily the son of the Jesus christians worship. Jesus was a common name in the first century, like Bob or Sam are today.
Bar Jesus, drunk or sober would not have been the brother of a Jesus.
The answer is no, although Jesus himself was once accused of being a winebibber, which is someone who drinks too much wine. (Matthew 11:19)
Noah was a drunkard though...
Oh is he the guy that owed Jesus $50? Would make the story more interesting wouldn't it?
what hell kind of question is that?
I hope so - I would have more respect for him knowing that!
No, bar jesus was a magician and false prophet in the court of Sergius Paulus when he was procouncil of Cyprus. He was struck blind for interferring with Paul's work. Acts 13:6-12)
Squirrel is that you, you're nuts lol funny and a lil nutty
more than likely
so funny i belive he did have kin . though .
that's just funny right there.
yes he had five brothers
Nope. You must be confused.
No.. it's not true. However if you don't believe me just read Matthew, Mark, Luke and John within the Bible...to start with.
No.
Barjesus simply means '; Son of Jesus';
no ,who the hell told u that. jesus was an only child by old mary thats what made him so unique and special anyone who told u that is CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, I laughed. Seems there's a few Christians here that need to lighten up.... Thanks for the laughs that was just funny.
Peace to you.
no Barjesus was a sorcerer whom the apostles ran into during their ministry...
Act 13:6 And when they had gone through the isle unto Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew, whose name [was] Barjesus:
NO.. even look in the bible
Not to my knowledge.
Is it true that Jesus is going to come back blasting this song?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isfmKb_RP鈥?/a>
I read this in a religious publication. Is it true? Does it say this in the Bible?Is it true that Jesus is going to come back blasting this song?
nah he'll come back singing the rick roll song
';Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down...';Is it true that Jesus is going to come back blasting this song?
No, The Bible does NOT say that Jesus will return ';blasting that song.';
Provide PROOF that you read this in a religious publication.
NAME OF PUBLICATION
DATE
Otherwise, we know you're lying.
I'm thinking a little AC/DC. ';Highway to Hell'; just for the irony. Either that or he'll be playing an Andrew WK ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuw7tcftA鈥?/a> mix tape.
Jesus is dead. Sorry, but true. It does mention www.youtube in the bible. It also says that microwave ovens are great for warming TV dinners. Get a life and stop believing fiction.
No no, this one is more like it.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TSjiVOYDM-鈥?/a>
But he is supposed to be comming back singing a new song, so I don't expect the christians will recognise him. :)
No, He'll be playing :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL9ihXiFA鈥?/a>
but the scene will look like the Office Space Movie
or try :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1L8l3Lrz鈥?/a>
Since that song was not written in anytime B.C., no, it is not in The Bible. I think one of your girls is ten times bigger than your brain.
No this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMryIz0fg鈥?/a>
Most of the questions people are asking on here can be answered if they actually read the bible.
As far as your question, no, no music, just a loud thunderous clap, and then..........
Roflmao.
Totally right.
Looking at your booooooooooobies atleast I would definitely wana come back from the heavens.LOL.
Yep, this is going to be his chosen triumphal entry soundtrack.
i thought it was gonna be womanizer by britany spears.
Woah now calm down people.
Don't get toooo crazy! This place should be taken seriously!
Very funny (not).
I think your red thing that ur wearing is to tight. looen it so you can think.
ok you are not funny. This is what satan will be blasting to you.
easy......baby I GOT your money! awesome.
wow...dumb.
The Bible is an ancient historical book written by many men and it serves as a religious document and guide to how to live a good life. I do not think it should be taken literally and I do not think that it is likely that Jesus is coming back. That is my view... sorry.
you believe everything in religion... wow.loreal hair
I read this in a religious publication. Is it true? Does it say this in the Bible?Is it true that Jesus is going to come back blasting this song?
nah he'll come back singing the rick roll song
';Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down...';Is it true that Jesus is going to come back blasting this song?
No, The Bible does NOT say that Jesus will return ';blasting that song.';
Provide PROOF that you read this in a religious publication.
NAME OF PUBLICATION
DATE
Otherwise, we know you're lying.
I'm thinking a little AC/DC. ';Highway to Hell'; just for the irony. Either that or he'll be playing an Andrew WK ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuw7tcftA鈥?/a> mix tape.
Jesus is dead. Sorry, but true. It does mention www.youtube in the bible. It also says that microwave ovens are great for warming TV dinners. Get a life and stop believing fiction.
No no, this one is more like it.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TSjiVOYDM-鈥?/a>
But he is supposed to be comming back singing a new song, so I don't expect the christians will recognise him. :)
No, He'll be playing :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL9ihXiFA鈥?/a>
but the scene will look like the Office Space Movie
or try :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1L8l3Lrz鈥?/a>
Since that song was not written in anytime B.C., no, it is not in The Bible. I think one of your girls is ten times bigger than your brain.
No this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMryIz0fg鈥?/a>
Most of the questions people are asking on here can be answered if they actually read the bible.
As far as your question, no, no music, just a loud thunderous clap, and then..........
Roflmao.
Totally right.
Looking at your booooooooooobies atleast I would definitely wana come back from the heavens.LOL.
Yep, this is going to be his chosen triumphal entry soundtrack.
i thought it was gonna be womanizer by britany spears.
Woah now calm down people.
Don't get toooo crazy! This place should be taken seriously!
Very funny (not).
I think your red thing that ur wearing is to tight. looen it so you can think.
ok you are not funny. This is what satan will be blasting to you.
easy......baby I GOT your money! awesome.
wow...dumb.
The Bible is an ancient historical book written by many men and it serves as a religious document and guide to how to live a good life. I do not think it should be taken literally and I do not think that it is likely that Jesus is coming back. That is my view... sorry.
you believe everything in religion... wow.
Is it possible that we do not yet understand Jesus' True Teachings and that is why we sin/suffer? ?
It seems to be like Jesus spoke symbollically and metaphorically. Is it possible that we still do not get his message? He also said to sick and suffering people that they have ';sinned';. Is it possible that sin is something different and something you should do? Not just believe in Jesus but something about his Teachings that is missing? Maybe we are still in the Darkness and not looking beyond to see the real meaning of Jesus' Teachings?Is it possible that we do not yet understand Jesus' True Teachings and that is why we sin/suffer? ?
He was telling us spiritual truth while we yet believe that our error is truth. Sin is not to be experimented with, as God is already infinite. He was clear on that point. Our present belief in darkness has the world content with darkness, and not many have the courage to stop and say, something is wrong with this picture, and take the first steps out into light. There are many teachings that miss the mark of what Jesus demonstrated, yet people are satisfied.Is it possible that we do not yet understand Jesus' True Teachings and that is why we sin/suffer? ?
No, there was a death, and Jesus allowed this death to happen so His purpose, to perform a miracle, could come to fruition. So others would speak His name tell His stories for generations. This death actually made Jesus cry. He felt the loss of a friend when Lazarus died. There is the shortest verse in the bible. 'Jesus wept.' Jesus knew the sting of death and he showed His Victory over death. I think it's James 4:17 that says, if a man knows of good things to do and does not do it, for that man he has sinned.
I AM NO LONGER IN THE DARK.. THE LESSONS I HAVE LEARNED THROUGH BIBLICAL SCRIPTURE HAS TURNED MY LIFE AROUND. I WAS ON PATH TOWARDS A DIVORCE AND SELF DESTRUCTION UNTIL I BEGAN TO APPLY THE LESSONS I HAVE LEARNED. YES, IT IS DIFFICULT TO COMPREHEND SOME TEACHINGS, BUT IF ONE CAN UNDERSTAND AND APPLY THEM IT TRUELY IS LIFE SAVING...
Is it possible Jesus was just some crazy Jewish guy who got killed then people made up the whole resurrection thing.
He was telling us spiritual truth while we yet believe that our error is truth. Sin is not to be experimented with, as God is already infinite. He was clear on that point. Our present belief in darkness has the world content with darkness, and not many have the courage to stop and say, something is wrong with this picture, and take the first steps out into light. There are many teachings that miss the mark of what Jesus demonstrated, yet people are satisfied.Is it possible that we do not yet understand Jesus' True Teachings and that is why we sin/suffer? ?
No, there was a death, and Jesus allowed this death to happen so His purpose, to perform a miracle, could come to fruition. So others would speak His name tell His stories for generations. This death actually made Jesus cry. He felt the loss of a friend when Lazarus died. There is the shortest verse in the bible. 'Jesus wept.' Jesus knew the sting of death and he showed His Victory over death. I think it's James 4:17 that says, if a man knows of good things to do and does not do it, for that man he has sinned.
I AM NO LONGER IN THE DARK.. THE LESSONS I HAVE LEARNED THROUGH BIBLICAL SCRIPTURE HAS TURNED MY LIFE AROUND. I WAS ON PATH TOWARDS A DIVORCE AND SELF DESTRUCTION UNTIL I BEGAN TO APPLY THE LESSONS I HAVE LEARNED. YES, IT IS DIFFICULT TO COMPREHEND SOME TEACHINGS, BUT IF ONE CAN UNDERSTAND AND APPLY THEM IT TRUELY IS LIFE SAVING...
Is it possible Jesus was just some crazy Jewish guy who got killed then people made up the whole resurrection thing.
How many true paths did Jesus teach there was?
One path. One mediator. One cramped and narrow gate. Just one.How many true paths did Jesus teach there was?
ONE.
Here is how narrow it is. Over the last 6000 years, only 144,000 have found that path. They are in the first resurrection. They are the first fruits. At the end of the 1000 year millennial reign of Jesus Christ, there will be the second resurrection - The Final Harvest (Great White Throne) and the rest of mankind will then have opportunity to find that path.
Rest assured, God knows exactly what he is doing.How many true paths did Jesus teach there was?
One very narrow path.
just 1 (one)
He said no one comes to God but through Him.
ONE.
Here is how narrow it is. Over the last 6000 years, only 144,000 have found that path. They are in the first resurrection. They are the first fruits. At the end of the 1000 year millennial reign of Jesus Christ, there will be the second resurrection - The Final Harvest (Great White Throne) and the rest of mankind will then have opportunity to find that path.
Rest assured, God knows exactly what he is doing.How many true paths did Jesus teach there was?
One very narrow path.
just 1 (one)
He said no one comes to God but through Him.
Who is the true savior: Jesus or Judas?
Jesus sacrificed his earthly life for humanity, whereas Judas sacrificed his soul forever in hell in order that there may be a martyred messiah to absolve humanity of their sins. Shouldn't Judas be lauded for his much more extreme sacrifice?Who is the true savior: Jesus or Judas?
What a fantastic question! Thank you for finally bringing up a perfect illustration of just how contrived all the bible stories are.Who is the true savior: Jesus or Judas?
No. Judas had the chance to repent and he chose not to. True, he felt sorry for what he did, but he still did not turn back to serving God. Judas died a sinner due to his own foolishness. Jesus died the death of a humble servant of God. His perfect sacrifice was the only sacrifice that could have been offered to bring about salvation. His resurrection was the only thing that could have adequately shown the power of God and His ability to raise those who have been buried with Christ. So, no. Judas could and never should be lauded for his ';sacrifice'; because it was not really a sacrifice. However, Jesus' death was the ultimate sacrifice. Let Him be praised forever!
@ Dee: but Jesus knew he was going to be betrayed by him and yet he did nothing, as if he wanted it to happen.
If Judas is being chewed in the mouth of Satan for all eternity like it says in Dante's inferno, or even just burning in fire, then Jesus' pain on the cross was nothing in comparison. If anything, Jesus betrayed Judas to Hell so that he would be posthumously glorified. Judas should be the one considered the saviour in the bible.
According to Gnostic belief, Judas knowingly sacrificed himself so that Jesus could be crucified and humanity could be saved. In this view, Judas was performing the much tougher act.
Nevertheless, the idea that Judas knew the consequences of his actions is not orthodox Christian belief.
Furthermore, Jesus, as the Son of God, is always going to be considered the true saviour over and above Judas or anyone else, no matter what they do.
I agree, I think I asked something similar to this before and I got a bunch of Christians hollering at me that Judas betrayed Jesus and that it was the greatest sin, blah blah blah. But if you stop to think about it Judas did all you Christians a favour, because without him the ball would've never got rolling on Jesus being cruxified (something he obviously had second thoughts about because he yelled out to God when dying ';Father why have you forsaken me?';)
The question is 'did he knowingly sacrifice himself, or was he just a traitor?' I think the Gnostics hold the belief that Judas did willingly sacrifice himself. Most orthodox christian religions hold him to be a simple traitor.
Jesus sacrificed His life to save humanity.
Judas took his own life instead of repenting. If he would have understood the true nature of Christ's mission he would have never done what he did.
Jesus is alive and well and Judas is dead and in hell. You don't need a degree from college to figure that one out.
whoa is that for real? Judas definetly has it worse then Jesus. Also Jesus was the son of God whereas Judas was just a man! Judas should be the one!
Judas played his part the way he was supposed to, so I doubt he is being punished.
Judas Iscriaot betrayed Jesus and should receive his Just reward....
Jesus is our true Savior.
wth? jesus
There are no saviors.
Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.
What a fantastic question! Thank you for finally bringing up a perfect illustration of just how contrived all the bible stories are.Who is the true savior: Jesus or Judas?
No. Judas had the chance to repent and he chose not to. True, he felt sorry for what he did, but he still did not turn back to serving God. Judas died a sinner due to his own foolishness. Jesus died the death of a humble servant of God. His perfect sacrifice was the only sacrifice that could have been offered to bring about salvation. His resurrection was the only thing that could have adequately shown the power of God and His ability to raise those who have been buried with Christ. So, no. Judas could and never should be lauded for his ';sacrifice'; because it was not really a sacrifice. However, Jesus' death was the ultimate sacrifice. Let Him be praised forever!
@ Dee: but Jesus knew he was going to be betrayed by him and yet he did nothing, as if he wanted it to happen.
If Judas is being chewed in the mouth of Satan for all eternity like it says in Dante's inferno, or even just burning in fire, then Jesus' pain on the cross was nothing in comparison. If anything, Jesus betrayed Judas to Hell so that he would be posthumously glorified. Judas should be the one considered the saviour in the bible.
According to Gnostic belief, Judas knowingly sacrificed himself so that Jesus could be crucified and humanity could be saved. In this view, Judas was performing the much tougher act.
Nevertheless, the idea that Judas knew the consequences of his actions is not orthodox Christian belief.
Furthermore, Jesus, as the Son of God, is always going to be considered the true saviour over and above Judas or anyone else, no matter what they do.
I agree, I think I asked something similar to this before and I got a bunch of Christians hollering at me that Judas betrayed Jesus and that it was the greatest sin, blah blah blah. But if you stop to think about it Judas did all you Christians a favour, because without him the ball would've never got rolling on Jesus being cruxified (something he obviously had second thoughts about because he yelled out to God when dying ';Father why have you forsaken me?';)
The question is 'did he knowingly sacrifice himself, or was he just a traitor?' I think the Gnostics hold the belief that Judas did willingly sacrifice himself. Most orthodox christian religions hold him to be a simple traitor.
Jesus sacrificed His life to save humanity.
Judas took his own life instead of repenting. If he would have understood the true nature of Christ's mission he would have never done what he did.
Jesus is alive and well and Judas is dead and in hell. You don't need a degree from college to figure that one out.
whoa is that for real? Judas definetly has it worse then Jesus. Also Jesus was the son of God whereas Judas was just a man! Judas should be the one!
Judas played his part the way he was supposed to, so I doubt he is being punished.
Judas Iscriaot betrayed Jesus and should receive his Just reward....
Jesus is our true Savior.
wth? jesus
There are no saviors.
Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.
Age of Mary when she gave birth to Jesus pbuh? and is it true that she married Josheph who was 90 years old?
I have been told mary was about 11 years old when she gave birth and like 12 when she married to joseph who was 90... Is this true?Age of Mary when she gave birth to Jesus pbuh? and is it true that she married Josheph who was 90 years old?
Probably 12-13 when she gave birth. No reason to believe Joseph was 90. Life expectancy for laborers probably wasn't that long anyways.Age of Mary when she gave birth to Jesus pbuh? and is it true that she married Josheph who was 90 years old?
Do you have an issue with this relationship....
This relationship was blessed by the angel Gabriel, hmmm, isn't he the same angel that spoke the entire Qu'ran to Mohammad......maybe this angel just likes pairing up old men with little girls.
Luke 1:26-33
26In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary. 28The angel went to her and said, ';Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.';
29Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30But the angel said to her, ';Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. 31You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. 32He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end.';
Mary was probably in her teens or possible twenties when she conceived and birthed Jesus Christ, and then married Joseph.
Mary was probably 17 or so and Joseph was about 10 years older, from what I've heard.
Sarah was 90 when Isaac was born and Abraham was 100. Maybe that's what you're thinking of.
Mary was around 14.
You're thinking of Mohammed's wife she was 9 when she married him and was pregnant the first time at 12.
?
yes, but in dog years.
no
Probably 12-13 when she gave birth. No reason to believe Joseph was 90. Life expectancy for laborers probably wasn't that long anyways.Age of Mary when she gave birth to Jesus pbuh? and is it true that she married Josheph who was 90 years old?
Do you have an issue with this relationship....
This relationship was blessed by the angel Gabriel, hmmm, isn't he the same angel that spoke the entire Qu'ran to Mohammad......maybe this angel just likes pairing up old men with little girls.
Luke 1:26-33
26In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary. 28The angel went to her and said, ';Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.';
29Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30But the angel said to her, ';Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. 31You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. 32He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end.';
Mary was probably in her teens or possible twenties when she conceived and birthed Jesus Christ, and then married Joseph.
Mary was probably 17 or so and Joseph was about 10 years older, from what I've heard.
Sarah was 90 when Isaac was born and Abraham was 100. Maybe that's what you're thinking of.
Mary was around 14.
You're thinking of Mohammed's wife she was 9 when she married him and was pregnant the first time at 12.
?
yes, but in dog years.
no
Is it true that the only reason Jesus wasnt born in America is coz they couldn,t find 3 wise men and a virgin?
Best answer wins a fabulous 3 week self catering cave holiday for 3 in Pakistan (flights not included) and a crisp 拢4 note.Is it true that the only reason Jesus wasnt born in America is coz they couldn,t find 3 wise men and a virgin?
you just made my day.lol...i'm religious myself, but that there was funnyIs it true that the only reason Jesus wasnt born in America is coz they couldn,t find 3 wise men and a virgin?
no thats why he wasn't born in London.
I am just amazed they could find one in the Middle East back then who was over the age of 9 ;)
LOL now answer mine .... http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;鈥?/a>
Do you usually copy and paste things you think are witty because you yourself are unoriginal and uninteresting?
Careful with that joke, it's an antique.
(I admit I found it mildly amusing)
no. that's not true! this kinda happened long b4 europeans arrives...so Jesus could have bn native american and how would Christianity have caught on so well, like it did in Rome, if Jesus had to go to separate, inward tribes. it wouldn't work. so there r more reasons then that but its NOT just cuz he couldn't find a virgin. they r evrywhere
Oh they found a virgin, but he as 35 yrs old and living in his mothers basement.
LOL. Good one. There are plenty of wise men who are hiding away from the limelight. And there are plenty of virgins, too. Jesus wasn't born in America because Jesus and God for that matter are figments of imagination.
ha ha ahhhhhhhhaaaaaahahaaaa
Actually, the main reason was that God didn't want to nonce up a fatty.
That's not true at all, every 12 year old I know is a virgin.
This even helps teen pregnancy rates, provided they have not been twelve for more then 3 months.
this isn't even original. ugh.
If Jesus had been born in North America (since America as a country didn't exist two millennia ago), we (westerners) MIGHT be following a Native America way of thinking about life, afterlife and the planet in general (';The Earth is our mother';, etc.) and, quite possibly, we wouldn't be in the global warming/ climate/ pollution/ species extinction mess we are now in.loreal hair
you just made my day.lol...i'm religious myself, but that there was funnyIs it true that the only reason Jesus wasnt born in America is coz they couldn,t find 3 wise men and a virgin?
no thats why he wasn't born in London.
I am just amazed they could find one in the Middle East back then who was over the age of 9 ;)
LOL now answer mine .... http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;鈥?/a>
Do you usually copy and paste things you think are witty because you yourself are unoriginal and uninteresting?
Careful with that joke, it's an antique.
(I admit I found it mildly amusing)
no. that's not true! this kinda happened long b4 europeans arrives...so Jesus could have bn native american and how would Christianity have caught on so well, like it did in Rome, if Jesus had to go to separate, inward tribes. it wouldn't work. so there r more reasons then that but its NOT just cuz he couldn't find a virgin. they r evrywhere
Oh they found a virgin, but he as 35 yrs old and living in his mothers basement.
LOL. Good one. There are plenty of wise men who are hiding away from the limelight. And there are plenty of virgins, too. Jesus wasn't born in America because Jesus and God for that matter are figments of imagination.
ha ha ahhhhhhhhaaaaaahahaaaa
Actually, the main reason was that God didn't want to nonce up a fatty.
That's not true at all, every 12 year old I know is a virgin.
This even helps teen pregnancy rates, provided they have not been twelve for more then 3 months.
this isn't even original. ugh.
If Jesus had been born in North America (since America as a country didn't exist two millennia ago), we (westerners) MIGHT be following a Native America way of thinking about life, afterlife and the planet in general (';The Earth is our mother';, etc.) and, quite possibly, we wouldn't be in the global warming/ climate/ pollution/ species extinction mess we are now in.
Is it true that during Jesus life the jewish were considered as terrorists for the roman imperialists?
The entire narrative of Jesus’ arrest, trial and crucifixion does not fit with what I know of history. I also sincerely believe the story of Barabbas was fabricated by the early church fathers to demonize Jews for not abandoning Judaism for their new replacement theology. The circular reasoning of this story and some of the elements in it are hard to palate if one is at all familiar with Hebrew or Jewish history or Roman history for that matter. I assert it was fabricated since there has NEVER been any other mention of the non-existent ';custom'; of pardoning a prisoner for Passover anywhere else outside this story..designed to claim that the Jews could have 'saved' the ';savior'; ..and instead chose the criminal who had a literal name of the ';son of the father'; rather than the son of God. Hmmm..
Now..since the VERY first appearance of that story, Jews have asserted that it was ridiculous for several reasons.
1) No such custom associated with Passover existed..no reason for it to exist..it did not fit with any known Jewish law.
2) No Roman record of there ever being any pardons for Passover in the entire time of their occupation of Judea exist...and there ARE archaeological records of much of their goings on in Judea when it came to edicts and proceedings.
3) The Romans were crucifying and persecuting Jews. If there HAD been such a bizarre custom...WHY would the persecutors honor that custom when they honored no other customs, and in fact sought to violate them to offend Jews to assert dominance.
Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman, scored winning points bringing up the falsehood of such a custom in his famous debate with an apostate Jew Pablo Christiani, a converted Jew, before King Jaime I of Spain in 1263
They also place a catch 22 onto the Jew.
Was it murder or willing self sacrifice?
Was it a human or was it a deity who died?
.
The New Testament story of Jesus' trial turns Jewish law and Jewish history recorded by Jewish scholars about the doings of the Sanhedrin during that time..topsy turvy.
The New Testament writers are trusting to the ignorance of their readers about Jewish law and about the established procedures of the Sanhedrin that were taken seriously, so that they don't get caught in those embellishments. For the most part because most people are not interested in learning about the ancient Jewish system they've been successful.
For instance, they do not know that a preliminary hearing of any kind, such as they allege to have taken place at the residence of Annas, or Caiphas( for even on that point there is no congruence in the Gospel accounts) could not possibly have been held. It violated their procedure and law they were sworn to uphold. The whole court simply threw out their vows? Absurd.
They do not know that a session of the Sanhedrin could not convene until the morning service at the Temple was completed. They also were apparently unaware that the Sanhedrin never met on a Friday, nor on the eve of a Pesach (Passover) Those were unalterable traditions. In addition, the charge of a crime that was capable of being sentenced to capital punishment had to have a mandatory appeals process and there could be up to five such appeals before sentence was carried out. Moreover, no sentence was to be passed on the same day as the trail was held.
The Sanhedrin was comprised of members of exceptional learning and character. No man could be a member of the Sanhedrin who had not previously filed three offices of ';gradually increasing dignity'; who was also not learned in sacred law, be free from ';haughtiness'; and never have been occupied in a trade or profession for the sake of financial gain or profit, he must be married and could not be a gambler, slave dealer or usurer, ..the list goes on to indicate that the members of the Sanhedrin were the most respected and given the task of upholding the Torah. Even if as history records, the head of the Sanhedrin during that time was also an appointee among them by the Romans, to claim they all behaved in such a manner as the New Testament depicted is more absurd than to claim the United States Supreme Court(for which there exist none of the strictly enforced prerequisites of character) would hold a capital murder trial in secret and have witnesses act out in the manner of a kangaroo court with people screaming and acting out with no decorum whatsoever.
To the ';objective'; observer who knows these facts of Jewish history about the proceedings of the Sanhedrin, the story claimed about it does not ring true at all. The picture of a confused and wild scene at the crack of dawn at the High Priests residence where the whole court throws out all Torah law they are sworn to uphold and have spent their lives defending appears utterly ridiculous. Not only do they not follow any procedure of their own court and call for the testimony of character witness for the defense first, but they allow witnesses to barge in and shout, they tie Jesus hands during interrogation and he is spat upon!
So it is obvious that the Sanhedrin trial of Jesus simply did not take place as it is depicted at all. Jesus did not appear before the Sanhedrin.
It was ONLY the Romans that a messiah hopeful or pretender would even threaten.
The Jewish idea of a Jewish republic with God as the master authority and the Torah as the law of the land with a Jewish king to uphold this law would only threaten the Roman overlords. Pilate would not look upon the leader of a band of Galilean rebels as a harmless teller of religious tales, yet because the Romans even knew that the Jewish prophecy of a Davidic messiah must be an anointed KING, they mocked him as '; king of the Jews';..
Pilate and the Romans were not PLACATING JEWISH WISHES. What the New Testament depicts as being done by the Jews flies in the face of any Jewish belief whatsoever. And from the VERY first appearance of those stories IN the New Testament, Jews have known that it was simply NOT TRUE that the Jews were the people who either sought or killed their savior deity (sacrificed human for sin) whichever it is they believe (as I recognize not all Christians agree on whether he was man or deity) Pilate would have been remiss in his duty to Rome if he had not halted this rebel. And to make Pilate, a man whose own record reveals his cruel streak, the innocent victim of the wishes of the Jewish mob does not fit written record of his own history. The New Testament shows him to be a weak and ineffective leader of Roman rule and that doesn't fit Roman history, either.Is it true that during Jesus life the jewish were considered as terrorists for the roman imperialists?
Generally, the Romans were prepared to accept deities from other cultures into their own pantheon, but because the Jews refused to worship any God but their own, it immediately put them into conflict with the Roman state. For this, and other reasons, Judea was a province where there was periodic revolt and upheaval - look at the Jewish zealots at Masadal, or the rebellion of Bar Kochba. Although it's too much of a generalisation to say that 'the Jewish were considered as terrorists' during the time of Jesus, there were certainly elements of the population of Judea who were.Is it true that during Jesus life the jewish were considered as terrorists for the roman imperialists?
For the Romans? No. Against the Romans? No, not in general. Rome conquered nations with overwhelming strength and rarely had to worry about people fighting back.
You may be thinking of the Sicarii, a small group of Jewish zealots who may have been active during Christ's time.
The Sicarii, who were a violent subgroup of terrorist Zealots, assassinated people considered collaborators with the Roman occupiers
and were considered what we would call terrorists by the Roman authorities.
This Sicarii group was named after a small dagger that they used in murdering people, often in crowds.
in that time, they were enemies of the empire (roman empire)
today, jews are the spoiled children of the current empires (USA and UK)
That is what the story of Barabbas is about. The Jews could decide who to let go. Did they want the peaceful (Gandhi type) leader released, or the violent rebel. They chose Barabbas/ the violent protest.
The only terrorists are the christians.
the jews were in a state of rebellion against a foreign power. that doesn't make them terrorists.
I serously doubt it, due towards they keep mocking at that Jesus claimed he was the son of God.
There were groups of Jews who led violent events against the Romans. Judas Iscariot was one of them. So was Barabbas.
I'd guess so.
A terrorist is just someone on the other side.
yes
Now..since the VERY first appearance of that story, Jews have asserted that it was ridiculous for several reasons.
1) No such custom associated with Passover existed..no reason for it to exist..it did not fit with any known Jewish law.
2) No Roman record of there ever being any pardons for Passover in the entire time of their occupation of Judea exist...and there ARE archaeological records of much of their goings on in Judea when it came to edicts and proceedings.
3) The Romans were crucifying and persecuting Jews. If there HAD been such a bizarre custom...WHY would the persecutors honor that custom when they honored no other customs, and in fact sought to violate them to offend Jews to assert dominance.
Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman, scored winning points bringing up the falsehood of such a custom in his famous debate with an apostate Jew Pablo Christiani, a converted Jew, before King Jaime I of Spain in 1263
They also place a catch 22 onto the Jew.
Was it murder or willing self sacrifice?
Was it a human or was it a deity who died?
.
The New Testament story of Jesus' trial turns Jewish law and Jewish history recorded by Jewish scholars about the doings of the Sanhedrin during that time..topsy turvy.
The New Testament writers are trusting to the ignorance of their readers about Jewish law and about the established procedures of the Sanhedrin that were taken seriously, so that they don't get caught in those embellishments. For the most part because most people are not interested in learning about the ancient Jewish system they've been successful.
For instance, they do not know that a preliminary hearing of any kind, such as they allege to have taken place at the residence of Annas, or Caiphas( for even on that point there is no congruence in the Gospel accounts) could not possibly have been held. It violated their procedure and law they were sworn to uphold. The whole court simply threw out their vows? Absurd.
They do not know that a session of the Sanhedrin could not convene until the morning service at the Temple was completed. They also were apparently unaware that the Sanhedrin never met on a Friday, nor on the eve of a Pesach (Passover) Those were unalterable traditions. In addition, the charge of a crime that was capable of being sentenced to capital punishment had to have a mandatory appeals process and there could be up to five such appeals before sentence was carried out. Moreover, no sentence was to be passed on the same day as the trail was held.
The Sanhedrin was comprised of members of exceptional learning and character. No man could be a member of the Sanhedrin who had not previously filed three offices of ';gradually increasing dignity'; who was also not learned in sacred law, be free from ';haughtiness'; and never have been occupied in a trade or profession for the sake of financial gain or profit, he must be married and could not be a gambler, slave dealer or usurer, ..the list goes on to indicate that the members of the Sanhedrin were the most respected and given the task of upholding the Torah. Even if as history records, the head of the Sanhedrin during that time was also an appointee among them by the Romans, to claim they all behaved in such a manner as the New Testament depicted is more absurd than to claim the United States Supreme Court(for which there exist none of the strictly enforced prerequisites of character) would hold a capital murder trial in secret and have witnesses act out in the manner of a kangaroo court with people screaming and acting out with no decorum whatsoever.
To the ';objective'; observer who knows these facts of Jewish history about the proceedings of the Sanhedrin, the story claimed about it does not ring true at all. The picture of a confused and wild scene at the crack of dawn at the High Priests residence where the whole court throws out all Torah law they are sworn to uphold and have spent their lives defending appears utterly ridiculous. Not only do they not follow any procedure of their own court and call for the testimony of character witness for the defense first, but they allow witnesses to barge in and shout, they tie Jesus hands during interrogation and he is spat upon!
So it is obvious that the Sanhedrin trial of Jesus simply did not take place as it is depicted at all. Jesus did not appear before the Sanhedrin.
It was ONLY the Romans that a messiah hopeful or pretender would even threaten.
The Jewish idea of a Jewish republic with God as the master authority and the Torah as the law of the land with a Jewish king to uphold this law would only threaten the Roman overlords. Pilate would not look upon the leader of a band of Galilean rebels as a harmless teller of religious tales, yet because the Romans even knew that the Jewish prophecy of a Davidic messiah must be an anointed KING, they mocked him as '; king of the Jews';..
Pilate and the Romans were not PLACATING JEWISH WISHES. What the New Testament depicts as being done by the Jews flies in the face of any Jewish belief whatsoever. And from the VERY first appearance of those stories IN the New Testament, Jews have known that it was simply NOT TRUE that the Jews were the people who either sought or killed their savior deity (sacrificed human for sin) whichever it is they believe (as I recognize not all Christians agree on whether he was man or deity) Pilate would have been remiss in his duty to Rome if he had not halted this rebel. And to make Pilate, a man whose own record reveals his cruel streak, the innocent victim of the wishes of the Jewish mob does not fit written record of his own history. The New Testament shows him to be a weak and ineffective leader of Roman rule and that doesn't fit Roman history, either.Is it true that during Jesus life the jewish were considered as terrorists for the roman imperialists?
Generally, the Romans were prepared to accept deities from other cultures into their own pantheon, but because the Jews refused to worship any God but their own, it immediately put them into conflict with the Roman state. For this, and other reasons, Judea was a province where there was periodic revolt and upheaval - look at the Jewish zealots at Masadal, or the rebellion of Bar Kochba. Although it's too much of a generalisation to say that 'the Jewish were considered as terrorists' during the time of Jesus, there were certainly elements of the population of Judea who were.Is it true that during Jesus life the jewish were considered as terrorists for the roman imperialists?
For the Romans? No. Against the Romans? No, not in general. Rome conquered nations with overwhelming strength and rarely had to worry about people fighting back.
You may be thinking of the Sicarii, a small group of Jewish zealots who may have been active during Christ's time.
The Sicarii, who were a violent subgroup of terrorist Zealots, assassinated people considered collaborators with the Roman occupiers
and were considered what we would call terrorists by the Roman authorities.
This Sicarii group was named after a small dagger that they used in murdering people, often in crowds.
in that time, they were enemies of the empire (roman empire)
today, jews are the spoiled children of the current empires (USA and UK)
That is what the story of Barabbas is about. The Jews could decide who to let go. Did they want the peaceful (Gandhi type) leader released, or the violent rebel. They chose Barabbas/ the violent protest.
The only terrorists are the christians.
the jews were in a state of rebellion against a foreign power. that doesn't make them terrorists.
I serously doubt it, due towards they keep mocking at that Jesus claimed he was the son of God.
There were groups of Jews who led violent events against the Romans. Judas Iscariot was one of them. So was Barabbas.
I'd guess so.
A terrorist is just someone on the other side.
yes
How do you reach out to the people who have not heard the true Gospel of Jesus Christ our God?
How do you explain to people what is the gospel?How do you reach out to the people who have not heard the true Gospel of Jesus Christ our God?
Just preach like Jesus did. Strike up conversations. I just explain our justice system as an analogy for God's only God's is perfect.
Those like Oracle and Michael K are hard hearted spiritually dead, God hating enemies of God. Yet God is still patiently waiting for them to repent before they they have their appointment. (Heb. 9:27) Or if they ignore His message and those who preach it, God may just cut their time short on this earth. As we know, as the Scriptures say, they will be consumed in an eternal flame, tortured without mercy by Demons, be consumed in darkness, not a drop of water for eternity.
The Bible refers to the fate of the unsaved with such fearful words as the following:
* ';Shame and everlasting contempt'; (Daniel 12:2)
* ';Everlasting punishment'; (Matthew 25:46)
* ';Weeping and gnashing of teeth'; (Matthew 24:51)
* ';Fire unquenchable'; (Luke 3:17)
* ';Indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish'; (Romans 2:8,9)
* ';Everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord'; (2 Thessalonians 1:9)
* ';Eternal fire...the blackness of darkness for ever'; (Jude 7,13)
Revelation 14:10,11 tells us the final, eternal destiny of the sinner: ';He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone...the smoke of their torment ascended up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day or night.';
All they got to do is Repent and that means to turn from sin to God. It's not a bad deal!
BTW Oracle and Michael K, take these verses up with God. He told us to preach so you don't have to face hellfire. Yet you tell us to keep our mouths shut. How dare you! Take this up with God if you don't like it. You can do it now and He may have mercy on you, or hell just got hotter in preparation for your arrival.
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen. Matt. 28:19-20
He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. Mk. 16:15How do you reach out to the people who have not heard the true Gospel of Jesus Christ our God?
Do not care what the oracle said, she is the troll of R/S
I spend some time here in R/S. Occasionally I visit other columns, but this R/S is my favorite.
I also talk to people in real life, but i have not done any mission trips yet. My church has a very active missions team, i want to do something, but I am not quite sure what.
I saw you asking a question in Thailand's question board, I think I try that too sometimes. I might have already done it but by mistake, lol
I love to share the gospel to people and the message is that God loves them. There is something very rewarding with it. Then there are hateful people who mock your beliefs, I leave them alone like God asks us to do in the Bible. However, here on R/S I really try to make time for the questions that non-believers ask.
Paul reasoned with people, both in person and in his letters.
Look for example at his time in Athens (Acts 17). He also went to the people (house to house Acts 20:20), as did the 12 apostles (Acts 7:42).
To understand the growth of Paul's reasoning method, read his letters in chronological order.
1 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians
Galatians
1 Corinthians
2 Corinthians
Romans
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
Philemon
Hebrews
1 Timothy
Titus
2 Timothy
hello....well first of all the bible says the gospel of jesus christ will be preached to the whole world then the end will come...GOD has chosen people from there birth to be ministers of the gospel...the gospel will be preached to the utter most parts of the earth....do you feel GOD is calling you???....the word gospel means glad tidings or good news and the good news is that jesus died for our sins and he wants to bring us salvation....
Read the book of Acts and the books of the Bible written by Paul. This was exactly what Paul was doing; reaching out to the people who had not heard the good news. Paul is an excellent example to follow but just like in Paul's case, you will be persecuted for doing so.
Mike R
I just finished a great book on evangelism which gave me tips on how to start eternal conversations with strangers. It also taught me how to present the Gospel clearly and effectively!! I am a born again Christian but need to do much more witnessing!!
You seem to be assuming that they want to know about it.
You also seem to be assuming that you have some kind of authority to go and push Christian teachings on people who might otherwise be perfectly happy without them.
Well, so far I have just been led by God Spirit to speak to certain people, with surprising results !!
Quite shocking actually coming from a door to door JW method !
God is in control not me.
I just have to be ready and willing to go when He says go !
Jesus is God's Son, not God. 1 John 5:5 says: ';And who can win this battle against the world? Only those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God.';
Before you can help others, you have to know the truth yourself.
Well...about the only people who haven't heard your nonsense are those uncontacted tribes in Peru. I guess you need to pack your bags.
Please keep your superstition to yourself.
Like Donna said, one shouldn't proselytize unless asked.
How about you don't unless asked.
How about you don't.
throw them a yarn, oops i mean rope.
Why do you assume you know better about a stranger's life than that person that you need to say they should believe YOU?
How about if I ram my personal beliefs down YOUR throat?!
Well Jesus isn't God...
Sooo....I dunno what is true about your Gospel.
Just preach like Jesus did. Strike up conversations. I just explain our justice system as an analogy for God's only God's is perfect.
Those like Oracle and Michael K are hard hearted spiritually dead, God hating enemies of God. Yet God is still patiently waiting for them to repent before they they have their appointment. (Heb. 9:27) Or if they ignore His message and those who preach it, God may just cut their time short on this earth. As we know, as the Scriptures say, they will be consumed in an eternal flame, tortured without mercy by Demons, be consumed in darkness, not a drop of water for eternity.
The Bible refers to the fate of the unsaved with such fearful words as the following:
* ';Shame and everlasting contempt'; (Daniel 12:2)
* ';Everlasting punishment'; (Matthew 25:46)
* ';Weeping and gnashing of teeth'; (Matthew 24:51)
* ';Fire unquenchable'; (Luke 3:17)
* ';Indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish'; (Romans 2:8,9)
* ';Everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord'; (2 Thessalonians 1:9)
* ';Eternal fire...the blackness of darkness for ever'; (Jude 7,13)
Revelation 14:10,11 tells us the final, eternal destiny of the sinner: ';He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone...the smoke of their torment ascended up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day or night.';
All they got to do is Repent and that means to turn from sin to God. It's not a bad deal!
BTW Oracle and Michael K, take these verses up with God. He told us to preach so you don't have to face hellfire. Yet you tell us to keep our mouths shut. How dare you! Take this up with God if you don't like it. You can do it now and He may have mercy on you, or hell just got hotter in preparation for your arrival.
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen. Matt. 28:19-20
He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. Mk. 16:15How do you reach out to the people who have not heard the true Gospel of Jesus Christ our God?
Do not care what the oracle said, she is the troll of R/S
I spend some time here in R/S. Occasionally I visit other columns, but this R/S is my favorite.
I also talk to people in real life, but i have not done any mission trips yet. My church has a very active missions team, i want to do something, but I am not quite sure what.
I saw you asking a question in Thailand's question board, I think I try that too sometimes. I might have already done it but by mistake, lol
I love to share the gospel to people and the message is that God loves them. There is something very rewarding with it. Then there are hateful people who mock your beliefs, I leave them alone like God asks us to do in the Bible. However, here on R/S I really try to make time for the questions that non-believers ask.
Paul reasoned with people, both in person and in his letters.
Look for example at his time in Athens (Acts 17). He also went to the people (house to house Acts 20:20), as did the 12 apostles (Acts 7:42).
To understand the growth of Paul's reasoning method, read his letters in chronological order.
1 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians
Galatians
1 Corinthians
2 Corinthians
Romans
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
Philemon
Hebrews
1 Timothy
Titus
2 Timothy
hello....well first of all the bible says the gospel of jesus christ will be preached to the whole world then the end will come...GOD has chosen people from there birth to be ministers of the gospel...the gospel will be preached to the utter most parts of the earth....do you feel GOD is calling you???....the word gospel means glad tidings or good news and the good news is that jesus died for our sins and he wants to bring us salvation....
Read the book of Acts and the books of the Bible written by Paul. This was exactly what Paul was doing; reaching out to the people who had not heard the good news. Paul is an excellent example to follow but just like in Paul's case, you will be persecuted for doing so.
Mike R
I just finished a great book on evangelism which gave me tips on how to start eternal conversations with strangers. It also taught me how to present the Gospel clearly and effectively!! I am a born again Christian but need to do much more witnessing!!
You seem to be assuming that they want to know about it.
You also seem to be assuming that you have some kind of authority to go and push Christian teachings on people who might otherwise be perfectly happy without them.
Well, so far I have just been led by God Spirit to speak to certain people, with surprising results !!
Quite shocking actually coming from a door to door JW method !
God is in control not me.
I just have to be ready and willing to go when He says go !
Jesus is God's Son, not God. 1 John 5:5 says: ';And who can win this battle against the world? Only those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God.';
Before you can help others, you have to know the truth yourself.
Well...about the only people who haven't heard your nonsense are those uncontacted tribes in Peru. I guess you need to pack your bags.
Please keep your superstition to yourself.
Like Donna said, one shouldn't proselytize unless asked.
How about you don't unless asked.
How about you don't.
throw them a yarn, oops i mean rope.
Why do you assume you know better about a stranger's life than that person that you need to say they should believe YOU?
How about if I ram my personal beliefs down YOUR throat?!
Well Jesus isn't God...
Sooo....I dunno what is true about your Gospel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)