Protestant vs. Catholic Vs. Muslim Cage-Match to the death: why did Jesus [as] die?

[rockinred]

buffed, you are trying to hard to find fallacies in organized religious beliefs... drop catholic, protestant, muslim, disagreements and think about what is being said. I did that for many, many years, only to find that there is no church that is infallable. No church that has all the answers and no church that has not been plagued with mans teaching and agenda.

there are scriptures that support that God has allowed this to be. Read the weeds and wheat analogy that is given in the scriptures.

When your search for intellectual intelligence or enlightenment through doctrines stops, it goes down to, we will not know many things, and it is not really our prerogative to judge what others sin and who God should forgive. What we need to focus on is our own salvation and relationship with God. I leave all judgment behind and let the Almight be the judge of who is wrong and who is right and who will be fit for his Kingdom. I don't do that anymore. No one has ever appointed me judge of anyone. that is why there is so much division, because many fill their pride stepping in and they need to give the answer for every thought that enters mans mind in relation to God.... it just causes haughty decisions to be made.

All that Love and do God's works are my brothers and sisters, regardless of religion. I will leave the rest of the sorting out to God at his own appointed time.

[Kratos]

buff, stiring God stew again lol

[BuffedGuy]

I'm still wondering if you know all this already and are just baiting me....

Hahaha, I'll be honest. I'm baiting. This is FIGHT CLUB, not "Ask a Christian" thread.

But at the same time, I am also double-checking things with you, since you are somewhat of an authority. I've had this discussion with other Christians before--and also read Christian books before on this--but I haven't ever had this conversation with someone on your level. So I just want to make sure I've not been having strawman arguments.

But since I have laundry to do, and chicken to eat, I'm just going to link you to Aquinas' answer: http://newadvent.org/summa/4001.htm#article2

Cmon man, this is a cop-out. Give me an answer here!

I read your entire post and I still don't really know the answer to the question/argument, i.e. why was it necessary for God to send Jesus [as] to die for our sins, when He could simply have just forgiven us like He had forgiven those aforetime? You said:

but they didn't always

the primary way of forgiveness of sins in OT Judaism was via sacrifice.

sure, there were isolated cases of forgiveness without sacrifice, but the standard way was sacrifice.

I would disagree with this assessment of yours. Even Jesus [as] himself asks for forgiveness from God, without any sacrifice. And I could dig up more examples.

But fine, let's say that this is a minority of the time...still, the fact remains: God could just forgive like He did aforetime. So why now did it suddenly change to God needing to send His Son to die for our sins? Obviously there was no need, since God had simply forgiven before...Now, keep in mind that I ask this because I've heard it countless times from Christians that God *had* to send His Son to die for our sins, so I'm simply asking: why? And I disagree with you that it's just like trying to prove or disprove God. I am arguing that this belief is internally inconsistent.

To give an analogy: if I was able to open a door for many years, then suddenly my friend comes up to me and says "I can pick the lock for you so you can open it." I would be like "no, it's ok, I've been opening the door for years without needing to pick any lock." It just seems...superfluous.

Anyways, I'm going to go study now...but I want to see an answer!

Buffed,

It is not an excuse for lawlessnes... but, let me ask you a question first. Maybe the answer lies in the question. If you do not convert to Christianity and live a life according to any way that promotes good deeds, can you work your way into heaven or can your works be looked upon as good and riteous? will the Almighty not look upon you as dirty, no matter how much you claim you are without defile? Can you live a life without sin? Is a man capable of doing so? You cannot decieve God who sees the inner being.

Now, I am sure you will agree that no man has pure thoughts and inequity does not enter his mind, right? your questions answer lies within the answer of this question... can a man or you be pure and without sin?

Can you please rephrase your post? I don't quite understand your post.

[D7M]

Fine.

Go study. I'll post a response later....

[rockinred]

there is a key point in all of this has been lost. The payment of sin is death.... you die, how can that be altered? Only through Jesus' death has that been altered...

you sin, you repent, you don't get to keep living... I think that is where many theologians lose grasp of what Jesus' death really means.... people try to rationalize without the premise or base of what is being said. the payment of death is sin, period. We all die and that is a fact. you cannot change that with good deeds that stack up against your bad deeds.

buffed, please answer this as this is the premise of faith... you used an analogy of opening a door and this is some new way to open it now, through Jesus. Actually the door has never beened opened. Many have been forgiven, but no one has altered death and gained life. Do you believe that anyone has altered this? Why?

If you really want to just keep this between you and Derek, that is fine, but it could have been done through PM's.

My whole first post was addressing the need and payment for sin. If you skip passed that and just try to focus on the relationship of a sinner and repentence toward God, then you are misunderstanding everything and then I do understand why you woud not need to believe that Jesus was the only pure Lamb of God that covered and takes away the sins of the world.

[BuffedGuy]

Hey RockinRed, I want your input. I just didn't get what you meant in the last post of yours, so I wanted you to reword it.

I still don't quite get what you mean here:

Many have been forgiven, but no one has altered death and gained life. Do you believe that anyone has altered this? Why?

Keep in mind that I'm not a Christian, so I might not understand some of the lingo.

OK, I am actually going to sleep, not study. Dead tired.

Peace.

[JiGGaMaN]

Well, I don't actually mean to start a cage match. It was tongue-in-cheek. Just wanted to hear some views on this issue. And I also wanted to make sure that Muslims aren't having strawman arguments, considering the fact that most people we preach to don't know the issues that well. Mostly I just wanted to hear Derek's thoughts on issues I hear a lot, but wanted to double-check on. Basically, I want to know if I properly understand the Christian viewpoint, as well as the difference between Protestants and Catholics on this issue.

i think he was trying to say there is a reason why the politics/religion/war forum was closed. you could get much better information on a religious forum.

[higherdesire]

mat. 7:6

[g0dsend]

You should should ask this question somewhere that the fluent in religion. I'm sure you will get a better response.

[subaruwrx04]

As a christian... Jesus died on the cross for you. If you believe in Jesus it does not mean your sin are forgiven. For your sins to be forgiven. The holy spirit has to draw upon your heart and you have to beleive and know Jesus died on the cross for you. As well u have pray to him while your heart is drawn upon and ask him to forgive you for your sins and tell him he's your chirst in savior. From that day for he's there for you. Always will be. If you do wrong Jesus will show you that you have done wrong. Say your saved and your out partying or whatever its like your dragging him threw the mud. Your a son of god and your doing sins and making his name look bad bringing him to shame. Putting his name to shame. He forgives you and is the only god that can garantee you a place in heaven. So why wouldnt you want to live right for him. Everyone sins only man ever in this world that has never sinned and thats Jesus.

As to Jesus tell me one other GOD that died and ressurected..All other "Gods" are in a tomb doing nothing.

[Tock]

To make things eazy for everybody . . .
The New Testament is built on the foundation of the Old Testament, which is so chuck-full of factual errors:

* Moses' Exodus adventure as written contradicts every known bit of archeological evidence (which is a lot) except for the dusty writings of the Hebrews, in which they portray themselves as superheros with the only god worth a damm.
** In the Book of Genesis, which was supposedly written by Moses 500 years before the first kings of Israel, is mentioned the fact that Israel had kings. Premonition? Nope. The book was written several centuries after the events were supposed to have happened. Shocking? Not really; people write historical fiction all the time.
*** Talking animals, such as snakes and donkeys? Nope, I don't think so.
**** Noah's Ark had less than 3 acres of deck space. Nevertheless, we are expected to agree that it makes sense that hundreds of thousands of animals were on board, along with enough food and water to feed them for 14 months? And then the kangaroos managed to swim across the barrier from Asia to Australia, and did so without leaving any family along the way from the Ark's supposed landing place? Nope, I don't think so.
***** Did fire-breathing seamonsters (Leviathan) actually exist? Nope, I don't think so.



So many errors and so much silliness, in fact, that any religion that attempts to build upon it is itself tainted with error and silliness, which goes a long way to explain the raving nonsense in the Book of Revelation.

Beleive whatever you like or brings you comfort, but I'll stick with what makes sense, thank you very much. Until I find a communication from a bona-fide god, I'll stick with www.subgenius.com because it's a lot more entertaining . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_SubGenius
The Church of the SubGenius is a religious group satirizing religion, conspiracy theories, UFOs, and popular culture. Originally based in Dallas, Texas, the Church of the SubGenius gained prominence in the 1980s and 1990s subculture and maintains an active presence on the Internet. Publicly accessible cited figures from 1988 indicated a membership of 3500[1] at that time and "more than 5000"[2] by 1990.

The Church of the SubGenius claims to have been founded in the 1950s by the world's greatest salesman J. R. "Bob" Dobbs. "Bob" Dobbs is depicted as a cartoon of a Ward Cleaver-like man smoking a pipe. The church really started with the publication of SubGenius Pamphlet #1 in 1979. It found acceptance in underground pop-culture circles and has been embraced on college campuses, in the underground music scene, and on the Internet.


The Church describes its philosophy in the following manner:

The Church Of The SubGenius is an order of Scoffers and Blasphemers, dedicated to Total Slack, delving into Mockery Science, Sadofuturistics, Megaphysics, Scatalography, Schizophreniatrics, Morealism, Sarcastrophy, Cynisacreligion, Apocolyptionomy, ESPectorationalism, Hypno-Pediatrics, Subliminalism, Satyriology, Disto-Utopianity, Sardonicology, Fascetiouism, Ridiculophagy, and Miscellatheistic Theology.

—The Book of the SubGenius, page 5

These terms, used in a manner that deliberately parodies Scientology and New Age terms, reflect the Church's appeal. It portrays itself as an organization for "mutants, blasphemers, disbelievers, rebels, outcasts, hackers, freethinkers,"[citation needed] and people who generally consider themselves outside the "mainstream" of society. The organization is widely seen as a satire that mocks organized religion, or as the church describes itself, "a cynisacreligion."

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you, Subaruwrx.

As to Jesus tell me one other GOD that died and ressurected.

Challenge accepted! *ding ding* Round 2! Fight!

1. Adonis, a pagan Greek god, who died and came back to life
2. Dionysus, another pagan Greek god, who died and came back to life
3. Krishna, a pagan Hindu god, who died and came back to life
4. Osiris, a pagan Egyptian god, who died and came back to life
5. Tammuz, a pagan Babylonian god, who died and came back to life
6. Attis, a pagan god worshiped in Anatolia and imported to Rome, was suspended on a tree, crucified, buried and rose again.
7. Ishtar, a pagan Babylonian and Assyria, who died and was resurrected.
8. Iao, a pagan Nepalese god, survived crucifixion.
9. Odin, the pagan Nordic god, hung from a tree and was resurrected.
10. Alcestos, a pagan god of Euripides, was crucified as atonement for the sins of the people of the world.
11. Horus, a pagan Egyptian god, who died and came back to life.
12. Melquart, a pagan Syrian god, died and rose again.

Among many, many others...

Pagans have believed in man-gods, who supposedly died and came back to life, long before Christianity. In fact, the Abrahamic faiths came to abolish this entire concept. To reiterate this point: this was the calling card of the Abrahamic faiths, for which they chastised the pagans for. Remember: Pharaoh himself claimed to be an immortal god, and he was opposed by none other than Prophet Moses (peace be upon him). Glorified and Exalted be God above being a man; God is Transcendent. God is Immortal and cannot die; it does not befit His Majesty. God is All-Powerful and Ever-Living, and cannot die.

The Bible itself says of the disbelievers:

"While claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images that looked like mortal human beings, birds, four-footed animals, and reptiles. For this reason, God delivered them to sexual impurity as they followed the lusts of their hearts and dishonored their bodies with one another. They exchanged God's truth for a lie and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen."

(Romans, 1:22-25)

I pray that God opens your heart to the truth, as written in the Bible itself.

I apologize if this post seems aggressive. I don't believe in bashing your religion, or saying it has no good in it. Rather, I believe as the Quran instructs us to say to the Christians:

"Say: O People of the Book! Come to a common word between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God." (Quran, 3:64)

I believe that by discussing our Holy Books, we can come to a Common Word. I don't think Islam is a complete rejection of Christianity, but rather it is an affirmation of the truth within it, and a part of progressive revelation. I believe my job as a Muslim is simply to remind the People of the Book of what they have forgotten in their own Book.

However, I can understand if this post comes across as offensive. If that is the case, let me know and I will delete it, God-Willing. My intention is not to step on toes here, but rather to have a peaceful dialogue where both sides can express their theological views. Having said that, I can understand if this post seems too polemical and I can remove it if it offends.

I will reply to the rest of your post shortly, God-Willing.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[higherdesire]

Hebrews 4:1-5
4:1 Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not;
4:2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.
4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
4:5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.

and
1 Corinthians 2:12-14
2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

[subaruwrx04]

Im with you on the new testement. Its full of crap that man has tried to change his words. King James Version speaks the word of god and the truth. Im glad Jesus Christ is in my life. My life is so much easier with him. Trying to be a son god is not easy though. Anyone can say that your saved. I can look at someone and think there saved. But all we see is whats on the outside. I dont know there heart. They are the only person that knows if there going to heaven or hell. Is your saved by the Blood of Jesus Christ welcome to heaven if not I would advise you to do so. You have to be Born again. Theres no other religion that says in the bible that if your saved your going to heaven. Jesus is the only one that garantees you a spot in HEAVEN. Some people say how do you know Jesus or God is real. Easy as that I just say have you ever been saved. If you have ever had the holy ghost in you, at that point you know Jesus is the true god. Jesus died for you. He loves each and everyone of you. Sinners or Saints. Saved or not saved. He forgives you just let him.

I read someones post above saying Jesus always asked for forgiveness. Your crazy he's not a sinner only god that has never sinned. Only human that has ever walked this earth that has never sinned. Jesus constantly asked God to forgive the people thats harmed him and said they dont know better or what there doing. Ill tell you what Jesus saved a wretch like me. Ive been down the road that never ends. A road of hatred, violence, drugs, addiction, you name it. Jesus says come as you are. And he saved me. He forgives me for everything that I have ever done. He has me a spot in heaven with my daughter. God bless her soul. Im telling everyone if your saved by the Blood of Jesus Christ you will see the golden shores. I cant stress this enough YOU HAVE TO BE BORN AGAIN.. Saved..... To go to heaven.

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you, Subaru.

Im with you on the new testement. Its full of crap that man has tried to change his words. King James Version speaks the word of god and the truth.

I'm a bit confused by what you just said. You said on the one hand that the New Testament is "full of crap" and then said the King James Version speaks the word of God. Yet, isn't the New Testament contained within the King James Version? How can one be false and the other true? (As a side-note, I would not use the wording of "full of crap" for a holy book, but I would say that part of it--according to our belief--has been corrupted, although part of it is the truth.)

There is another issue here: the King James Version is not the most reliable text compared to the other versions, such as the NIV. The King James Version was compiled in the very beginning of the 1600's. Since then, hundreds of manuscripts have been uncovered, which date back closer to the originals and are thus considered more authentic. And what they have found is that many verses in the KJV are simply not found in those ancient manuscripts, meaning that they have been added into the Bible by unscrupulous scribes.

What is even more troubling I think is that many of those "favorite verses" that Christians like to quote from the KJV have since been removed from the text due to the fact that they were added into the Word of God by scribes. So you will not find them in the newer versions of the Bible such as the NIV.

Im glad Jesus Christ is in my life. My life is so much easier with him.

Is not God Himself capable of coming to your aid and help? God says in the Quran:

"Invoke not, besides God, anyone, for they can neither profit your, nor hurt you! But if you did so, you shall certainly be one of the wrongdoing polytheists. And if God should afflict you with harm, then there is none to remove it but He; and if He intends good to you there is none to repel His grace.” (Quran, 10:106-107)

Saying that you need Jesus (peace be upon him) in addition to God Almighty (whom you call "the Father") is saying that God is not enough. But God is All-Powerful, Most Merciful, The All-Sufficient!

God says:

“Verily those whom you call upon besides God are servants like you. Therefore, call upon them, and let them listen to your prayers, if you are indeed truthful!” (Quran, 7: 194)

“Call upon those whom you imagine beside God! They have not an atom’s weight of power either in the heavens or in the earth, nor have they any share in either, nor does He need any of them as a helper.” (Quran, 34:22)

"They taken, besides Him, gods that can create nothing but are themselves created; that have no control of hurt or good to themselves.” (Quran, 25:3)

“Christ disdains not to serve and worship God, nor do the angels, those nearest to God.” (Quran, 4:172)

Theres no other religion that says in the bible that if your saved your going to heaven.

The issue though is this very belief. Does not this belief create a situation whereby the believers become lax in their sins?

I read someones post above saying Jesus always asked for forgiveness.

It would indeed be absurd for God to pray to Himself. And this is one of the proofs we use to know that Jesus (peace be upon him) was not God. The Bible says:

Matthew 26:39 "…he [Jesus] fell with his face to the ground and prayed, 'My Father…'"

Jesus (peace be upon him) even said:

Matt. 27:46 “My God, My God, why have You forsaken me?”

Why would he (peace be upon him) say such a thing if he was God Himself?

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[RuhlFreak55]

once again.....why did we start allowing religion threads......he was a guy....he's dead...that's that

[BuffedGuy]

My question is this: Did Jesus (peace be upon him) die for the sins of all those who came before him? From the time of Adam all the way to the birth of Jesus, which included hundreds of generations of mankind? So did Jesus (peace be upon him) die for all their sins as well?

[RuhlFreak55]

well see since when people die it's usually due something within themselves he died from blood loss or asphyxiation.......and yes...OF COURSE....rofl he went into the whole thing just so he could die for other people....oh wait a second....NO ONE WOULD DO THAT!!!

[BuffedGuy]

Ruhl, please maintain civility.

..why did we start allowing religion threads

If you do not wish to participate, there is nobody here who can compel you to click on the link.

[quarry206]

i am not religious at all, but i love religion of every type as a form of history... and i am wording this is very general so don't rip apart my wording, its the concept i'm trying to put out...

one of the things that is touched on but not fully said is .. actually all the beliefs hold one thing true. all of the higher powers are for giving and know that man will sin..

the concept of repenting or asking for forgiviness in any religion is to show you are truely sorry. If you rape somebody you can't just ask for forgiveness because you knew you were wrong. the concept is you have to repent what you need most. if rape is caused by lust you must give up all lust. if you murder because of anger, you don't ask for forgiveness and say you will never murder again. you show your knowledge of it being wrong by pushing out your anger.

This can be worded lots of different ways but its the root of the concept of all religions.. man can and will sin, and asking for forgiveness for the one act is not what you must do, you must ask for forgiviness for your problem and issue...

[subaruwrx04]

Buffed.. As to the the different versions there interpreted. Alot of them are very wrong interpretations. KJV vs NIV.. KJV is about as real as it gets. NIV man interpreted bibles to come up with there own opinion on what its saying.

Did Jesus (peace be upon him) die for the sins of all those who came before him? From the time of Adam all the way to the birth of Jesus, which included hundreds of generations of mankind? So did Jesus (peace be upon him) die for all their sins as well?

Answer is yes Jesus died for everyones sins. In the book of matthew is says. He came to give his life to die and his death would purchase salvation for others. This was the primary reason he came to earth. His blood was poured out for others.

Romans 5:6-8; 2 Corinthians 5:14; 1 Thessalonians 5:10 all says he died for us..

1 Corinthians 15:3; Gal. 1:4 all says he died for our sins..

Theres many more just throwing them some out there.

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you, Subaru.

Did Jesus (peace be upon him) die for the sins of all those who came before him? From the time of Adam all the way to the birth of Jesus, which included hundreds of generations of mankind? So did Jesus (peace be upon him) die for all their sins as well?

Answer is yes Jesus died for everyones sins. In the book of matthew is says. He came to give his life to die and his death would purchase salvation for others. This was the primary reason he came to earth. His blood was poured out for others.

If Jesus (peace be upon him) died for the sins of all those who came before him and those who came after him, then I have two questions:

1) The Christians say that one must believe that Jesus is our Savior Lord--and believe that he died for our sins--in order to be saved...in order that Jesus's sacrificial act apply to us. Yet, did the people that came before Jesus was even born, believe that Jesus was their Savior Lord? What of the Jews, i.e. the people of Judeah? They did not believe in Jesus, because Jesus was not even born at that time. Think of Moses and his people: did they believe in Jesus as their Savior Lord? So why is it that Christians say that one must believe in Jesus as the Savior Lord, when in fact the people that came before Jesus was born never believed in any Trinity nor in Jesus nor in Jesus's sacrificial act, but simply prayed to God alone?

In other words, Christians say that in order for a person today to take advantage of Jesus's act, one must believe that he died for us. But what about those who came before Jesus was born? You said that their sins were all forgiven, but they did not believe in Jesus, his sacrificial act, or any of that? Why is it that the central belief to salvation changed so dramatically between then and now?

2) My second issue is: the Bible--especially in the Old Testament--talks about the punishments for various sins. It warns the people that if they commit certain sins--such as fornication and adultery--they will be condemned to the abyss of Hell-Fire. This warning is given, I presume, in order to dissuade the people from such acts. Now, my question is: if all of these sins were to be forgiven by the act of Jesus, then why did God promise these people with Hell-Fire? Was God lying to them in the Old Testament?

If you say that all of these verses refer to the disbelievers, then this makes no sense whatsoever: only a believer would take heed to the Word of God in the first place. Such verses would have no effect on the disbeliever, who doesn't recognize that it is the Word of God in the first place. Furthermore, a disbeliever is *already* going to Hell-Fire due to his unbelief.

So we must assume that the punishment of Hell-Fire threatened for the sinners is for the believers: why did God then promise them Hell-Fire if they were all to be forgiven? Why did God lie to them? Is it befitting God to lie? Does not God fulfill His Promise? What was the purpose of promising punishment to fornicators and adulterers if nobody is going to be punished except those who would not heed the Message anyways since they don't believe in it to begin with? Furthermore, it seems that the true punishment then is for unbelief, not fornication and adultery--since those who believe in Jesus's act are supposedly going to Heaven, not Hell. Therefore, in reality, the punishment is for unbelief, not fornication or adultery. Why then does God even mention the punishments for these sins, if in reality the only punishment is for not believing in Jesus as your Savior Lord, whereas those who fornicate and commit adultery will go scot-free so long as they believe in Jesus?

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[rockinred]

Peace be unto you, Subaru.



If Jesus (peace be upon him) died for the sins of all those who came before him and those who came after him, then I have two questions:

1) The Christians say that one must believe that Jesus is our Savior Lord--and believe that he died for our sins--in order to be saved...in order that Jesus's sacrificial act apply to us. Yet, did the people that came before Jesus was even born, believe that Jesus was their Savior Lord? What of the Jews, i.e. the people of Judeah? They did not believe in Jesus, because Jesus was not even born at that time. Think of Moses and his people: did they believe in Jesus as their Savior Lord? So why is it that Christians say that one must believe in Jesus as the Savior Lord, when in fact the people that came before Jesus was born never believed in any Trinity nor in Jesus nor in Jesus's sacrificial act, but simply prayed to God alone?

In other words, Christians say that in order for a person today to take advantage of Jesus's act, one must believe that he died for us. But what about those who came before Jesus was born? You said that their sins were all forgiven, but they did not believe in Jesus, his sacrificial act, or any of that? Why is it that the central belief to salvation changed so dramatically between then and now?

2) My second issue is: the Bible--especially in the Old Testament--talks about the punishments for various sins. It warns the people that if they commit certain sins--such as fornication and adultery--they will be condemned to the abyss of Hell-Fire. This warning is given, I presume, in order to dissuade the people from such acts. Now, my question is: if all of these sins were to be forgiven by the act of Jesus, then why did God promise these people with Hell-Fire? Was God lying to them in the Old Testament?

If you say that all of these verses refer to the disbelievers, then this makes no sense whatsoever: only a believer would take heed to the Word of God in the first place. Such verses would have no effect on the disbeliever, who doesn't recognize that it is the Word of God in the first place. Furthermore, a disbeliever is *already* going to Hell-Fire due to his unbelief.

So we must assume that the punishment of Hell-Fire threatened for the sinners is for the believers: why did God then promise them Hell-Fire if they were all to be forgiven? Why did God lie to them? Is it befitting God to lie? Does not God fulfill His Promise? What was the purpose of promising punishment to fornicators and adulterers if nobody is going to be punished except those who would not heed the Message anyways since they don't believe in it to begin with? Furthermore, it seems that the true punishment then is for unbelief, not fornication and adultery--since those who believe in Jesus's act are supposedly going to Heaven, not Hell. Therefore, in reality, the punishment is for unbelief, not fornication or adultery. Why then does God even mention the punishments for these sins, if in reality the only punishment is for not believing in Jesus as your Savior Lord, whereas those who fornicate and commit adultery will go scot-free so long as they believe in Jesus?

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

Most of your understanding of Christianity is a misunderstaniding.... Can you please show me one verse, just one verse in the Old Testament that even mentions the term Hell-Fire? There is no such term. There is no such term in the New Testament either....

Prior to Jesus, they believed in the prophecy of the coming of the annointed one and savior.... They bear witness of him. We don't know how God will judge at the appointed time... They all professed faith in his coming, just as I profess faith in him without seeing him.

Buffed, you still need to answer why your fore-fathers made burnt offerings to Allah/God? You are the decendent of Abram, right? Why did he offer sacrifice? What does that mean and why did they stop? You must answer this in order to understand who Jesus is and what he claimed to fulfill and also why he was awaited by all the prophets unto their own death too.

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you, RockinRed.

Most of your understanding of Christianity is a misunderstaniding.... Can you please show me one verse, just one verse in the Old Testament that even mentions the term Hell-Fire? There is no such term. There is no such term in the New Testament either....

Hell is mentioned in both the Old Testament and the New. Are you actually denying this? Or are you simply contesting the usage of the term "Hell-Fire"? Please let me know. If it is the former, then I can provide you with relevant verses. If it is the latter, then it is simply a matter of semantics: the Bible says "hell" and "fire", and I simply say "Hell-Fire" out of habit, possibly because that's what we Muslims call it. The point is that Hell and the Lake of Fire exist, as mentioned in the Bible (both OT and NT). What you call it is hardly important, especially with regards to the argument I put forward.

Prior to Jesus, they believed in the prophecy of the coming of the annointed one and savior.... They bear witness of him. We don't know how God will judge at the appointed time... They all professed faith in his coming, just as I profess faith in him without seeing him.

They believed in the Messiah, just as the Jews and the Muslims do. But did they believe that Jesus died for our sins, or would die for our sins? This is a crucial point. You see, Christians today say that salvation today is limited to those who believe that Jesus died for our sins as the Savior Lord, so this excludes Jews and Muslims. However, if one must simply believe in the coming of the Messiah, well then: both Jews and Muslims do, and Muslims affirm that Jesus is the Messiah.

So this is crucial for you to answer: did the people who came before Jesus was born, did they believe that Jesus died (or would die) for our sins? (Christian belief) Or did they simply believe in the coming of the Messiah? (Muslim belief)

Buffed, you still need to answer why your fore-fathers made burnt offerings to Allah/God?

Please clarify what you are talking about, God-Willing.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[subaruwrx04]

Must say pretty true speaking rock..

[rockinred]

Peace be unto you, RockinRed.



Hell is mentioned in both the Old Testament and the New. Are you actually denying this? Or are you simply contesting the usage of the term "Hell-Fire"? Please let me know. If it is the former, then I can provide you with relevant verses. If it is the latter, then it is simply a matter of semantics: the Bible says "hell" and "fire", and I simply say "Hell-Fire" out of habit, possibly because that's what we Muslims call it. The point is that Hell and the Lake of Fire exist, as mentioned in the Bible (both OT and NT). What you call it is hardly important, especially with regards to the argument I put forward.



They believed in the Messiah, just as the Jews and the Muslims do. But did they believe that Jesus died for our sins, or would die for our sins? This is a crucial point. You see, Christians today say that salvation today is limited to those who believe that Jesus died for our sins as the Savior Lord, so this excludes Jews and Muslims. However, if one must simply believe in the coming of the Messiah, well then: both Jews and Muslims do, and Muslims affirm that Jesus is the Messiah.

So this is crucial for you to answer: did the people who came before Jesus was born, did they believe that Jesus died (or would die) for our sins? (Christian belief) Or did they simply believe in the coming of the Messiah? (Muslim belief)



Please clarify what you are talking about, God-Willing.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

Buffed, the only term in the old testament used to referr to the grave is called "Sheol". This term is loosely translated into English term of Hell (which is a english term of Hades, which is a Greek term used to discuss greek mythology and a firey hell). There is no other term in Hebrew except sheol, which means the grave, or dead. That is a fact.

In the New Testament Jesus used the term Gehenna that many bible translators translated into English term hell, which was a place outside of Jeruselum that was a big dump. He used this term to reference utter destruction, not some firey torment of humans. The term Hades is used by the apostles that wrote letters (Greek) that is also loosely translated into Hell in English. the Lake of Fire is referred to in the book of revelation and it is stated that all things will be cast into the lake of fire, including hell or (sheol), death, pain, suffering, are all cast into lake of fire, which means utterly destroyed and they will not be anymore. Not a fire that consumes and hurts people. This lake of fire (complete destruction sentence by God alone) is also what Jesus called Gehenna, which was an anology used at the time so people in that area could understand because when they threw things into gehenna it was the filth and trash, not a place of torment. They understood this and only now has this been misconstrued to mean something else... Sodom and Gomora was also referred to as cast into the lake of fire in the book of Jude. This explains exactly what that term means... sentence to destruction by God, not a place of torment. Sodom and Gomorra exist no more and will never be again. It was a real city and the first to undergo a sentence of destruction into the lake of fire by God Almighty.

the coming of the Messiah, was to break the bonds of sin and free man to a relationship with God.... So those who awaited with faith, might not have understood it this way, only after Jesus came was the revelation of the true meaning of the prophecies fulfilled... meaning he died as a ransom price in order for man to be re-united back with God. What was the ransom price?

this leads into this last question. The Jews offered a sacrifice for the covering of their sins, through the shed blood. This was a foreshadow of the one sacrifice that would truly cover the sins and give man the chance to live again. The lambs blood did not cover the sins of adam and man, only another perfect man like adam, Jesus, aka second adam would suffice. So many awaited the Messiah, and he came and many did not recognize and many still do not.

Abraham offered sacrifices for the covering of his sins.... Do you know why? That is why those who believe in Jesus do not do this practice or act of faith anymore, because the Lambs blood covers the sins that was forshadowed in the past.

Do you not believe that Abraham made sacrifices to God?

[rockinred]

Buffed, I know the Quran teaches about a hell-fire also. the Quran was written around 610-632 a.d... according to modern records. What I am saying is that this belief system in a hell fire was not taught by the Jews or early Christians... Rather it is a belief system that developed later. When the Quran was written the Catholic church and Eastern Orthodox church had already pushed this belief system well into the world as an accepted belief system of the churches. so the Quran is also plagued with this fallacy.

The premise of Jesus and man is that the payment of sin is death. All go to the grave (sheol, hades, hell), to rest or sleep to be awakened to life. Jesus's life opened the doors to life again. You don't keep living after you die, thats it. That is why his blood (aka life) was shed. All before jesus went to their grave with a hope like I do now. If you believe that people continue to live after they die, wich is an oxy moron statement, then there is no need for Jesus. but if you die because of your sin and the only way to alter death as a sin, is to believe, then there is a need for a savior. All who went to sleep before with a hope and all who go to sleep after with a hope, will be brought back to life. Jesus' body did rise and that is my hope to.

[subaruwrx04]

Jesus came here for everyone.. Truth be told if your not saved... Hell is bound to come... You have to have Jesus in you heart and soul to enter into heaven. I dont know how heaven or hell is but in the bible he gives a little preview what heaven is like. No one knows what hells like but Im not going there. Take Christ as your savior and please save yourself. I pray all the time for the lost ones and the people that have disbelief.. But you have to step forward though.

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you, RockinRed.

Buffed, the only term in the old testament used to referr to the grave is called "Sheol". This term is loosely translated into English term of Hell (which is a english term of Hades, which is a Greek term used to discuss greek mythology and a firey hell). There is no other term in Hebrew except sheol, which means the grave, or dead. That is a fact.

In the New Testament Jesus used the term Gehenna that many bible translators translated into English term hell, which was a place outside of Jeruselum that was a big dump. He used this term to reference utter destruction, not some firey torment of humans. The term Hades is used by the apostles that wrote letters (Greek) that is also loosely translated into Hell in English. the Lake of Fire is referred to in the book of revelation and it is stated that all things will be cast into the lake of fire, including hell or (sheol), death, pain, suffering, are all cast into lake of fire, which means utterly destroyed and they will not be anymore. Not a fire that consumes and hurts people. This lake of fire (complete destruction sentence by God alone) is also what Jesus called Gehenna, which was an anology used at the time so people in that area could understand because when they threw things into gehenna it was the filth and trash, not a place of torment. They understood this and only now has this been misconstrued to mean something else... Sodom and Gomora was also referred to as cast into the lake of fire in the book of Jude. This explains exactly what that term means... sentence to destruction by God, not a place of torment. Sodom and Gomorra exist no more and will never be again. It was a real city and the first to undergo a sentence of destruction into the lake of fire by God Almighty

You are now debating as if your view--that Hell does not exist in Christianity--is the majority view of Christians. Rather, it is the exact opposite. Here is a prominent Protestant website affirming the existence of hell:

The universal punishment for all who reject Jesus Christ as Savior is to be “cast into the lake of fire” (Revelation 20:15) As far as sin is concerned, the Bible declares that failing to keep God’s law in even the smallest aspect makes us guilty of all of it and therefore worthy of eternal punishment (James 2:10).

http://www.gotquestions.org/Divine-C...s-Inferno.html

And more explicitly:

Question: "Is hell real? Is hell eternal?"

Answer: It is interesting that a much higher percentage of people believe in the existence of Heaven than believe in the existence of Hell. According to the Bible, though, Hell is just as real as Heaven. The Bible clearly and explicitly teaches that Hell is a real place to which the wicked/unbelieving are sent after death. We have all sinned against God (Romans 3:23). The just punishment for that sin is death (Romans 6:23). Since all of our sin is ultimately against God (Psalm 51:4), and since God is an infinite and eternal Being, the punishment for sin, death, must also be infinite in eternal. Hell is this infinite and eternal death, what we have earned because of our sin.

The punishment of the wicked dead in hell is described throughout Scripture as “eternal fire” (Matthew 25:41), “unquenchable fire” (Matthew 3:12), “shame and everlasting contempt” (Daniel 12:2), a place where “the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:44-49), a place of “torment” and “fire” (Luke 16:23-24), “everlasting destruction” (2 Thessalonians 1:9), a place where “the smoke of torment rises forever and ever” (Revelation 14:10,11), and a “lake of burning sulfur” where the wicked are “tormented day and night forever and ever” (Revelation 20:10).

The punishment of the wicked in Hell is as never-ending as the bliss of the righteous in Heaven. Jesus Himself indicates that the punishment in Hell is just as everlasting as eternal life in Heaven (Matthew 25:46). The wicked are forever subject to the fury and the wrath of God in Hell. They consciously suffer shame and contempt and the assaults of an accusing conscience for all of eternity. Even those in Hell will acknowledge the perfect justice of God (Psalms 76:10). Those who are in Hell will know that their punishment is just and that they alone are to blame (Deuteronomy 32:3-5). Yes, Hell is real. Yes, Hell is a place of torment and punishment that lasts forever and ever, with no end! Praise God that through Jesus, we can escape this eternal fate (John 3:16,18,36).

http://www.gotquestions.org/hell-real-eternal.html

Here is what an Orthodox Christian website says:

HELL, unpopular as it is among modern people, is real. The Orthodox Church understands hell as a place of eternal torment for those who willfully reject the grace of God. Our Lord once said, "If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched--where 'Their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched' " (Mark 9:43, 44). He challenged the religious hypocrites with the question: "How can you escape the condemnation of hell?" (Matthew 23:33). His answer is, "God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved" (John 3:17). There is a Day of Judgment coming, and there is a place of punishment for those who have hardened their hearts against God. It does make a difference how we live this life. Those who of their own free will reject the grace and mercy of God must forever bear the consequences of that choice.

http://www.protomartyr.org/believe.html

And here is what the Catholics believe about Hell, with a detailed explanation:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

In other words, all three branches (Protestants, Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox) believe in Hell as I understood it.

If you take a different view, that's fine. (Although it is a bit frustrating how it seems that Christians are a bit inconsistent in their views.) But in any case, the argument still remains the same! Regardless of what you believe "Hell" will be like, you *must* agree that the wicked will have a certain fate, distinct from that of the believers:

Daniel 12:2 "Many of those who lie dead in the ground will rise from death. Some of them will be given eternal life, and others will receive nothing but eternal shame and disgrace."

So my entire argument still remains the same. Why does the Bible threaten "eternal shame and disgrace" and "everlasting punishment" for sins if all sins are forgiven if you just believe in Jesus? Shouldn't the Bible *only* warn against disbelief in Jesus? Why warn against the other sins leading to damnation? For example, in 1 Corinthians, it is said:

"Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).

Yet, does not this belief--that Jesus died for your sins and thus you will still go to Heaven if you just believe in him, even if you are a fornicator--contradict the above verse?

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[subaruwrx04]

Not trying to flame but you cant trust a website about religion. Everyone is different.

[rockinred]

buffed, so do we cease to discuss the issue because I don't represent the majority view? Is there more Hindu's in the world than christians or muslims? Does that mean the majority rule, so they are more right in their beliefs. Were there not more pagans than Jews in the world?

What I am attempting to explain to you is the relationship of Jesus to eternal life as the savior and messiah. The reason you have such a good argument against a church teaching/doctrine and not what I am saying, is because you can see obvious flaws in a certain man made teachings... what I am saying is that teaching is not necessarily truth. I did not start saying some crazy doctrine, just referenced the bible. I refrain from saying that I understand better than others, I only understand what I read.

Even in your examples from the resurection as spoken through Daniel... it is not a fire torment... but an eternal shame or disgrace... if you are destroyed and remembered for ever and ever for rejecting God and truth, would that not be the same as an eternal disgrace? Much different then alive and suffering forever and ever for actions made over a short 50yrs. Also, Paul's statement does state about the reward of God's Kingdom. Not talking about a firey torment. Also, if you have done those things and come to Jesus, yes I believe that you will escape judgment. It does not mean you continue to do those things.. how can you call yourself a follower of Jesus if you do those things?.. I think you are twisting what believing in Jesus really means.

Also, we are trying to discuss judgment of others and their actions. I already stated clearly that I don't know and I leave it to God. I am not saying that only catholic, protestants, and whoever will be in God's Kingdom. That is mans way... Only God will determine those things and rightly so.

There are many belief systems that have been plagued and integrated into religious organizations.

I will ask you one more time and if you dodge this question that I asked on the very first post then I will stop talking. Why did the Jews sacrifice to God? What did that mean?

[subaruwrx04]

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 faith alone that Jesus, who is God, died for our sins on the cross as FULL PAYMENT for all our sins, and then Jesus rose from the dead..

Curious of your answer aswell.

Why did the Jews sacrifice to God? What did that mean?

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you both.

Not trying to flame but you cant trust a website about religion.

I disagree. I believe that the internet has all sorts of websites on it, of varying degrees of authenticity. Some websites are highly reliable, whereas others are totally unreliable. The websites I referenced are considered of good repute and standing.

Everyone is different.

Sure, but if everyone in a religion is saying something different, then that lacks consistency. Having said that, I want to hear what someone like Derek has to say about someone just coming up with their own views on such matters like Hell.

buffed, so do we cease to discuss the issue because I don't represent the majority view? Is there more Hindu's in the world than christians or muslims? Does that mean the majority rule, so they are more right in their beliefs. Were there not more pagans than Jews in the world?

Perhaps I should have clarified: I wished to have a dialogue with those who represent mainstream Christianity.

The reason you have such a good argument against a church teaching/doctrine and not what I am saying, is because you can see obvious flaws in a certain man made teachings...

But what you are not understanding is that the argument still applies to your views. You recognize that believers in Jesus and disbelievers in him will have two different fates. Regardless of how you define those two different fates, my argument still applies! I really wish you could see that: just think about it logically.

It does not mean you continue to do those things.. how can you call yourself a follower of Jesus if you do those things?.. I think you are twisting what believing in Jesus really means.

My point was: a belief that all your sins will be automatically forgiven leads to a laxity towards sins.

Why did the Jews sacrifice to God? What did that mean?

First, I just want to clarify something for the record: they were Jews in the sense that they were from Judeah.

Second, with regards to the issue of sacrifices, we Muslims believe that God commands us:

“Therefore turn in prayer to your Lord and sacrifice.” (Quran, 108:2)

We believe that sacrificial acts are one part of worship, along with prayer, giving alms to the poor, fasting, etc. Sacrifice is done as thanks to God, and atonement for sins. The main purpose about sacrifice is to give up that which is of value to you to God. Back then, a person's livestock was considered extremely valuable, and therefore to sacrifice it to God showed one's devotion. Even today, paying to purchase animals to sacrifice means giving up what we humans cherish, i.e. money, for God. Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) was asked to sacrifice what he cared for the absolute most, his own son, to show his complete devotion to God. (God was simply testing Abraham, and told him to sacrifice an animal instead of his son.)

One other point to be mentioned is that God does not need the sacrifice. It does not benefit Him in any way. Rather, it only benefits our own souls. Furthermore, after the animal is slaughtered, the meat is given to the poor, the needy, the hungry, the orphans, one's neighbors, and kith and kin.

But anyways, back to the point: sacrifice has been a part of worship since the time of Abraham. The purpose was for a person to sacrifice that which is dear to him, as thanks to God and atonement for sins. I do not see how sacrificing Jesus (peace be upon him) could replace this act or fulfill it any way. It is not like God needs someone's blood. The entire purpose of sacrifice was for a person to sacrifice what is near and dear to himself, for God, and to feed the poor servants of God.

The entire act of sacrifice was as a means of benefit for the soul of the person carrying out the sacrifice, not for God. God does not benefit even one bit from any of our acts of worship, because God is free from all needs and wants. We cannot benefit God in any way. Therefore, the sacrificial act was only for our own benefit, and to take it away by replacing it with one huge sacrificial act--wherein we don't even sacrifice our own wealth or goods--just doesn't make sense, and it is a departure from what has been done since the time of Abraham by the Abrahamic faiths.

To give an appropriate analogy: God has commanded us to give alms to the poor, as thanks to Him and as expiation for our sins. This act, of giving alms to the poor, only benefits *us*, not God, because God is free of all wants and needs. Would it make sense for God to replace all alms-giving obligation by sending down one prophet who gave one huge donation on behalf of everyone? Surely that would not make sense, since it would deny us all the benefit of giving alms, the whole point of which is to give from our own wealth and goods. Likewise, sacrifice is to be done from one's own wealth and goods, otherwise it holds little meaning. The purpose is to give up something of value to yourself, something you yourself own and cherish.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[BuffedGuy]

I think this leads to a very important question: who benefited from sacrifice, as done by the people since the time of Abraham? God or the people? Why does God command us to pray? Is it for His benefit? Does God need us to pray to Him? Does He benefit from it at all; does He gain anything from our prayers? Or is prayer for our own benefit? And what about sacrifice: why does God command it? Does God need the sacrifice to survive? Does it add to His Kingdom?

This is a very crucial question, and I'll explain its relevance to the sacrificial act of Jesus that Christians believe in.

[D7M]

The purpose was for a person to sacrifice that which is dear to him, as thanks to God and atonement for sins. I do not see how sacrificing Jesus (peace be upon him) could replace this act or fulfill it any way. It is not like God needs someone's blood. The entire purpose of sacrifice was for a person to sacrifice what is near and dear to himself, for God, and to feed the poor servants of God.

*sigh* I was trying hard to stay out of this....

The newadvent.org site is as authentic as it gets (in terms of Catholicism)

I'm not sure exactly what you want my opinion on about hell. Besides, I think I answered that already in my other thread.

Here's the logic of the atonement, Buffed. Take it or leave it.

The punishment of sin is death (where sin=both original and actual sin)

Man could never fully return the justice owed to God because of man's sin, since sin causes an infinite breach injustice that, strictly speaking, only God can repay.

Yet, man was was still responsible.

But, the theandric action of Christ's sacrifice fulfills both those conditions.

That's as basic as it gets. The shortest cliff notes version of St. Anslem's Cur Deus Homo you'll ever see.

Keep in mind, it's an argument ex fide, that is, from faith. I am of the personal opinion that there is not ratiocination of the necessity of the Incarnation and Atonement.

[D7M]

I think this leads to a very important question: who benefited from sacrifice, as done by the people since the time of Abraham? God or the people?

This is a very crucial question, and I'll explain its relevance to the sacrificial act of Jesus that Christians believe in.

The people, since God is only related to His creation by a logical relation.

Hence, there is no change in God, but only a change on our side (ex parte subiecto).

[BuffedGuy]

The people, since God is only related to His creation by a logical relation.

My issue is this: first, I showed how in the Old Testament we have people who asked God for forgiveness for their sins, and God granted it to them, just like that. Without any sacrifice whatsoever. They asked; God gave it.

Then, you said: well, most times the Jews had to do a sacrifice. And thereby you were trying to link their sacrificial acts to the sacrificial act of Jesus. This was in order to show continuity in belief.

However, I am trying to explain that this cannot be the case, because the *entire* purpose of sacrifice--as done since the time of Abraham (peace be upon him)--was to benefit the person himself. Abraham had to sacrifice his son, not because God needed His son to survive, and not because God would benefit from this at all. Rather, the purpose was for the benefit of Abraham himself. It put Abraham to the test, and as we all know, testing a person is a way of making them better. For example, after I graduate from medical school, I have to take a huge exam called the USMLE. The USMLE is for my own benefit in a sense, because it causes me to learn a great deal when I study for it.

Likewise, the sacrifice of Abraham was for Abraham's own benefit. We *MUST* believe this; it would be polytheism to claim that God needed the sacrifice or benefited from it, since Abrahamic monotheism demands a belief in an All-Powerful God, free of all wants and needs.

Since the time of Abraham, we have been instructed to emulate Abraham, by sacrificing our livestock, which the people cherished, and their wealth, which we all cherish. If you remove that factor, then you have resorted back to the pagan belief that their gods needed the sacrifices.

It is as if you are claiming that God needs someone's blood in order to forgive sins. Why? Why can't God just forgive it? I think your argument is completely inconsistent, since you've already admitted that (1) God forgave without any sacrifices at all, as I showed in the OT. (2) The entire purpose of sacrifice is not that God needs blood to be shed, but rather to give up that which is of value to oneself, like Abraham did with his son. This simply is not the case with Jesus, since no Christian today is sacrificing something of his own, which he values and cherishes.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[rockinred]

Buffed, well I can go into depth meaning of atonement, but I was rejected out of the conversation because I am not considered mainstream Christianity. I can speak on behalf of it with pretty good credentials, but I chose to talk about what we are discussing... fyi, I once was a Catholic Apologetic for many years and I am very familiar with all Christian doctrines... I was also with the Baptist church for many years too, I have read Augustines works, Irenaeus works, Thomas Kempis, the Philokaliah, many early writings, and many, many modern day works as well as the whole reformation and forming of the protestant church, etc... I am not an ordained speaker of a church, but I am very well versed in mainstream doctrines.

The whole reason that I avoid these threads is because I did these things for many years and realized that I was sowing seeds of doubt and not building up. Most of these never go anywher....I told myself that I need to stop and focus on what we have in common and let God do the sorting.

Now, the reason I posted in your thread is because you started this as a debate to take away the meaning of Jesus' life. And you started it in a haughty sort of way. I don't like it, but you have a right to your belief. I am getting out of this now... you do seem to be pretty bright, but you also seem to want to stick to what you know you can argue only.... the second I talked about the scriptures outside of mainstream, you back out. This to me shows you are not willing to talk about it with a sound heart, but you want to let your pride step in to show how smart you are and how you can disprove something you are already familiar with. This is not impressive to me... If I started to talk about Muslims and a mis-guided belief system, and you started in and said, we don't believe that way...then I go on to say, well you don't qualify as a muslim because you don't believe like the majority.. how would you react? In fact I remember some misconceptions in your ask a muslim thread that you defended as not all of us feel that way, right?

Anyhow, have a good day.

[Matt]

Wtf am i doing in here???

[g0dsend]

A little interesting fact I found out, Jesus is mentioned more times in the Quran than Muhammed.