Do you have any questions about the Bible?

[sonnygll]

I agree with Toc and a few other people who like logic and reason over superstition.

However, this whole thing brings a kind of moral dilemma.
Does the good of freeing someone from their guilt and superstition outweigh the evil of destroying their faith, which they have based their whole life on?

This would likely be a devastating blow to their mental well being.

For example I went on a date with a woman, and we agreed to part ways because she is very religious and I am not. I had talked about a bible verse where Jesus said some pretty bad stuff. She didn't believe it. I could have e-mailed her the verse later and shown her I was right. However it wouldn't do anything but cause her distress. So I opted no to send her the bible verse. Better to just let her think me a liar, and be happy in her ignorance.


However if the person will spread the religion meme on to others, or use it for any harmful purpose, then I would say crushing his faith is justified. As the lives of a few are more important then 1.

Of course in many cases religion is incurable. So unless the person shows signs of being open minded, so that you may help him to free himself, you should let it go. You will not cure a person like that, all you will do is cause him distress. Look up cognitive dissonance, and you will see part of what I mean.


I think Magic is deeply indoctrinated and his mind is closed on this subject. I also doubt he will have a great deal of negative impact on others due to religion. I therefore think chipping away at his faith causes him only harm. No good will come of this. We should just let him be.



As unbelievers we need to show Christians That we are very ethical and just, for no reason other than because it is the right way to be. No great reward, no horrific punishment. Just doing the greatest good for no other reason than being born knowing deep down that it is right.

[magic32]

Addressing the second part of your text first:

we are very ethical and just...Just doing the greatest good for no other reason than being born knowing deep down that it is right.

The fundamental problem with what is stated above is simply that of a STANDARD, you don't have one! Without standards terms like "Very ethical" and "Greatest good" are meaningless. What you posit is no different than saying you're the "Greatest/Best" student without using a grading system, such an honor only belongs to the valedictorian because his/her grades were compared to all others. Sure you could say that you're a "Very" good basketball player, but where is the standard for comparision...all kindergarteners in your zip code? The local YMCA? The Streetball tour bus? The European MVP trophy? The college player of the year award? The NBA MVP trophy? What???

Without a barometer all comparison breaks down, and this is where you are with "Very ethical" and "Greatest good"...NOWHERE!

--------------------------------
It is apparent that you read very little if any of this thread, as your post makes me sound like a rambling religious fanatic rather than a rational mind that believes in Christ. The problem here is obviously your contention that reason and Christ are diametrically opposed.
Let's take a look below.

I think Magic is deeply indoctrinated and his mind is closed on this subject. I also doubt he will have a great deal of negative impact on others due to religion. I therefore think chipping away at his faith causes him only harm. No good will come of this.

I'm EXTREMELY open-minded, but you're not putting anything into mine...PLEASE build a case for me.
In other words, GIVE me something to believe, or at least disprove what I do.

For example, I say there is a God and a Satan, you and Tock hold the opposite stance which puts us both in a pickle without proof.

• GOD: Well, I tender that the world itself, which no scientist worth his lab coat would assert merely came into existence, is testimony of God as well as the life, death, and resurrection of Christ whom we KNOW lived because of Biblical and extra-Biblical account. Just as we know Harod and Ramseys did.
  
  
• SATAN: By your account evil is a mere superstition...that sounds a lot like a brush off to me. How do you not acknowledge the abundance of NEGATIVE supernatural activity throughout the world from real witchcraft, voodoo and hoodoo to demonic possession (and please play the mental illness card, which could never do what people in these states have done).

For instance, (meaning I do NOT believe this), neither of us can TRULY use our physical senses to detect (much like God). How could you convince me otherwise? You'd indicate the signs, or the things that the mentally ill do that are inconsistent with those of healthy people. Now given enough inconsistencies, and especially if done prolifically (both measures used in the DSM IV), having no other definitive cause, I'd have to agree. For evaluation and diagnosis, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders primarily considers: the acts or behaviors; their intensity (mild, moderate, severe or profound); and frequency. Isn’t ODD that such scientific reasoning is not extended to Christ?

Jesus certainly existed making the ONLY REAL question, “Was He mere man, or God?” Well He claimed to be God which itself hints towards craziness…a la the God-Complex. But somehow He fulfills each criterion in grand fashion…I use the same logic here as above, let’s take a scientific look:
His actions and behaviors include clearly supernatural miracles.
The intensity of these miracles was profound healing the sick, diseased, blind, and lame including raising the dead.
Frequency exhibits great proficiency (never failed with a person), and astounding prolificacy (number of accounts are remarkable)

...the rest as they say is His-Story.

Sound reasonable? That only leaves one loose end…

The sole possible argument to the contrary is that of source information. Surely the protagonist of His own book will be made to into a hero. Even Matt Damon can be super agent in his own movie trilogy. So, as mentioned above, how do we KNOW without doubt that Harod and Ramseys truly existed and did what is credited them, or for that matter George Washington and Abe Lincoln? There is no photographical evidence of existence, or video footage of their acts as their lives predate such technology. But we safely TRUST in their existence and works because of collaborative multi-source accounts. So a fanatic as you described above, would be Biblically bound, whereas a reasoning man and seeker of truth would search for corroboration.

Are there any extra-Biblical records?

And if so, there should certainly be A LOT FOR SO GREAT A MAN/GOD! This is where evolution plummets, we can find dinosaurs but where are all these missing links (between species) and millions of years of evolving ape-like civilizations? Well they don’t exist but this is quietly overlooked…some science! But I digress, back to other accounts of Jesus, His works, followers, as well as signs that SUPPOSEDLY occurred during His death. Even a little research will reveal volumes...here's a start:

ANCIENT NON-CHRISTIAN SOURCES

Flavius Josephus (37-97 AD), court historian for Emperor Vespasian:
"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders." (Arabic translation)
-------------------------------
Julius Africanus, writing around 221 AD, found a reference in the writings of Thallus, who wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean around 52 AD, which dealt with the supernatural darkness that covered the land during Jesus's crucifixion:
-------------------------------

Cornelius Tacitus (55-120 AD), "the greatest historian" of ancient Rome:
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."
-----------------------
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, chief secretary of Emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD):
"Because the Jews of Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, [Claudius] expelled them from the city."
"After the great fire at Rome [during Nero's reign] ... Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief, led by one who did great miracles in all lands that could not be explained."
----------------------
Pliny the Younger, Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor around 112 AD:
"[The Christians] were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind." Pliny added that Christianity attracted persons of all societal ranks, all ages, both sexes, and from both the city and the country. Late in his letter to Emperor Trajan, Pliny refers to the teachings of Jesus and his followers as excessive and contagious superstition.
---------------------------
Emperor Trajan, in reply to Pliny:
"The method you have pursued, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those denounced to you as Christians is extremely proper. It is not possible to lay down any general rule which can be applied as the fixed standard in all cases of this nature. No search should be made for these people; when they are denounced and found guilty they must be punished; with the restriction, however, that when the party denies himself to be a Christian, and shall give proof that he is not (that is, by adoring our gods) he shall be pardoned on the ground of repentance, even though he may have formerly incurred suspicion. Informations without the accuser's name subscribed must not be admitted in evidence against anyone, as it is introducing a very dangerous precedent, and by no means agreeable to the spirit of the age."
------------------------------
Emporer Hadrian (117-138 AD), in a letter to Minucius Fundanus, the Asian proconsul:
"I do not wish, therefore, that the matter should be passed by without examination, so that these men may neither be harassed, nor opportunity of malicious proceedings be offered to informers. If, therefore, the provincials can clearly evince their charges against the Christians, so as to answer before the tribunal, let them pursue this course only, but not by mere petitions, and mere outcries against the Christians. For it is far more proper, if anyone would bring an accusation, that you should examine it." Hadrian further explained that if Christians were found guilty they should be judged "according to the heinousness of the crime." If the accusers were only slandering the believers, then those who inaccurately made the charges were to be punished.
--------------------------
The Jewish Talmud, compiled between 70 and 200 AD:
"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover."
[Another early reference in the Talmud speaks of five of Jesus's disciples and recounts their standing before judges who make individual decisions about each one, deciding that they should be executed. However, no actual deaths are recorded.]
------------------------------
Lucian, a second century Greek satirist:
"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. ... You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, who did truly and inexplicably disappear from the well guarded tomb…was He really God? All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property." Lucian also reported that the Christians had "sacred writings" which were frequently read. When something affected them, "they spare no trouble, no expense."
------------------------------
Mara Bar-Serapion, of Syria, writing between 70 and 200 AD from prison to motivate his son to emulate wise teachers of the past:
"What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burying Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the teaching of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given."

GNOSTICS SOURCES

The Gospel of Truth, probably by Valentius, around 135-160 AD:
"For when they had seen him and had heard him, he granted them to taste him and to smell him and to touch the beloved Son. When he had appeared instructing them about the Father. ... For he came by means of fleshly appearance." Other passages affirm that the Son of God came in the flesh and "the Word came into the midst. ... it became a body."
"Jesus, was patient in accepting sufferings. . . since he knows that his death is life for many. . . . he was nailed to a tree; he published the edict of the Father on the cross. ... He draws himself down to death through life. ... eternal clothes him. Having stripped himself of the perishable rags, he put on imperishability, which no one can possibly take away from him."
---------------------------------------
The Aprocryphon of John, probably by Saturninus, around 120-130 AD:
"It happened one day when John, the brother of James,--who are the sons of Zebedee--went up and came to the temple, that a Pharisee named Arimanius approached him and said to him, `Where is your master whom you followed?' And he said to him, 'He has gone to the place from which he came.' The Pharisee said to him, 'This Nazarene deceived you with deception and filled your ears with lies and closed your hearts and turned you from the traditions of your fathers.'"
---------------------------------
The Gospel of Thomas, probably from 140-200 AD:
Contain many references to and alleged quotations of Jesus.
--------------------------------
The Treatise On Resurrection, by uncertain author of the late second century, to Rheginos:
"The Lord ... existed in flesh and ... revealed himself as Son of God ... Now the Son of God, Rheginos, was Son of Man. He embraced them both, possessing the humanity and the divinity, so that on the one hand he might vanquish death through his being Son of God, and that on the other through the Son of Man the restoration to the Pleroma might occur; because he was originally from above, a seed of the Truth, before this structure of the cosmos had come into being."
"For we have known the Son of Man, and we have believed that he rose from among the dead. This is he of whom we say, 'He became the destruction of death, as he is a great one in whom they believe.' Great are those who believe."
"The Savior swallowed up death. ... He transformed himself into an imperishable Aeon and raised himself up, having swallowed the visible by the invisible, and he gave us the way of our immortality."
"Do not think the resurrection is an illusion. It is no illusion, but it is truth. Indeed, it is more fitting to say that the world is an illusion, rather than the resurrection which has come into being through our Lord the Savior, Jesus Christ."
". . . already you have the resurrection ... why not consider yourself as risen and already brought to this?" Rheginos was thus encouraged not to "continue as if you are to die."
-----------------------------------

LOST WORKS QUOTED IN OTHER SOURCES

Acts of Pontius Pilate, reports sent from Pilate to Tiberius, referred to by Justin Martyr (150 AD):
"And the expression, 'They pierced my hands and my feet,' was used in reference to the nails of the cross which were fixed in His hands and feet. And after he was crucified, they cast lots upon His vesture, and they that crucified Him parted it among them. And that these things did happen you can ascertain the 'Acts' of Pontius Pilate." Later Justin lists several healing miracles and asserts, "And that He did those things, you can learn from the Acts of Pontius Pilate."
-------------------------------
Phlegon, born about 80 AD, as reported by Origen (185-254 AD), mentions that Jesus made certain predictions which were all fulfilled.
--------------------------------

ANCIENT CHRISTIAN SOURCES
(extra-biblical)

Clement, elder of Rome, letter to the Corinthian church (95 AD):
"The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent forth from God. So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both therefore came of the will of God in the appointed order. Having therefore received a charge, and having been fully assured through the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and confirmed in the word of God with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth with the glad tidings that the kingdom of God should come. So preaching everywhere in country and town, they appointed their firstfruits, when they had proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons unto them that should believe."
--------------------------------
Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, letter to the Trallians (110-115 AD):
"Jesus Christ who was of the race of David, who was the Son of Mary, who was truly born and ate and drank, was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, was truly crucified and died in the sight of those in heaven and on earth and those under the earth; who moreover was truly raised from the dead, His Father having raised Him, who in the like fashion will so raise us also who believe on Him."
-------------------------------
Ignatius, letter to the Smyrneans (110-115 AD):
"He is truly of the race of David according to the flesh, but Son of God by the Divine will and power, truly born of a virgin and baptised by John that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him, truly nailed up in the flesh for our sakes under Pontius Pilate and Herod the tetrarch (of which fruit are we--that is, of his most blessed passion); that He might set up an ensign unto all ages through His resurrection."
"For I know and believe that He was in the flesh even after the resurrection; and when He came to Peter and his company, He said to them, 'Lay hold and handle me, and see that I am not a demon without body.' And straightway they touched him, and they believed, being joined unto His flesh and His blood. Wherefore also they despised death, nay they were found superior to death. And after His resurrection He ate with them and drank with them."
-------------------------------
Ignatius, letter to the Magnesians (110-115 AD):
"Be ye fully persuaded concerning the birth and the passion and the resurrection, which took place in the time of the governorship of Pontius Pilate; for these things were truly and certainly done by Jesus Christ our hope."
-------------------------------
Quadratus, to Emperor Hadrian about 125 AD:
"The deeds of our Saviour were always before you, for they were true miracles; those that were healed, those that were raised from the dead, who were seen, not only when healed and when raised, but were always present. They remained living a long time, not only whilst our Lord was on earth, but likewise when He had left the earth. So that some of them have also lived to our own times."
-------------------------------
Barnabas, written 130-138 AD:
"He must needs be manifested in the flesh. ... He preached teaching Israel and performing so many wonders and miracles, and He loved them exceedingly. ... He chose His own apostles who were to proclaim His Gospel. ... But He Himself desired so to suffer; for it was necessary for Him to suffer on a tree."
---------------------------------
Justin Martyr, to Emperor Antoninus Pius about 150 AD:
After referring to Jesus's birth of a virgin in the town of Bethlehem, and that His physical line of descent came through the tribe of Judah and the family of Jesse, Justin wrote, "Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, in which Jesus Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registers of the taxing made under Cyrenius, your first procurator in Judea."
"Accordingly, after He was crucified, even all His acquaintances forsook Him, having denied Him; and afterwards, when He had risen from the dead and appeared to them, and had taught them to read the prophecies in which all these things were foretold as coming to pass, and when they had seen Him ascending into heaven, and had believed, and had received power sent thence by Him upon them, and went to every race of men, they taught these things, and were called apostles."
----------------------------------
Justin Martyr, in Dialogue with Trypho, around 150 AD:
"For at the time of His birth, Magi who came from Arabia worshipped Him, coming first to Herod, who then was sovereign in your land."
"For when they crucified Him, driving in the nails, they pierced His hands and feet; and those who crucified Him parted His garments among themselves, each casting lots for what he chose to have, and receiving according to the decision of the lot."
"Christ said amongst you that He would give the sign of Jonah, exhorting you to repent of your wicked deeds at least after He rose again from the dead ... yet you not only have not repented, after you learned that He rose from the dead, but, as I said before, you have sent chosen and ordained men throughout all the world to proclaim that 'a godless and lawless heresy had sprung from one Jesus, a Galilean deceiver, whom we crucified, but His disciples stole Him by night from the tomb, where He was laid when unfastened from the cross, and now deceive men by asserting that He has risen from the dead and ascended to heaven.'"
"For indeed the Lord remained upon the tree almost until evening, and they buried Him at eventide; then on the third day He rose again."
-------------------------------

The real issue of the resurrection deals with its evidence. This evidence consists of the testimony of many people who stated that they had seen Jesus after His crucifixion and death. The same people who testified of the resurrection of Christ also gave up their social and economic security and put their lives on the line in order proclaim that Jesus had risen. Does it make any sense at all to say that they knew Jesus did not rise from the dead and had concocted an elaborate plan in order to deceive a great many people into believing that Jesus had risen? Why would they do that? Does it also make any sense that they would continue in this lie while being persecuted, ostracized from family and friends, beaten, imprisoned, and finally killed for what they believed?

It makes more sense to believe that their actions were consistent with their teaching. In other words, they taught about self-sacrifice, dedication to truth, love, peace, etc., and they based it all on the risen Lord. It was based upon the truth that they had seen.

[Tock]

I say there is a God and a Satan, you and Tock hold the opposite stance which puts us both in a pickle without proof.

Um, a "pickle without proof?" Not me.

You say, "Satan exists." How do we know this is true? I've never seen it, outside of Hollywood movies. Have you ever seen Satan? Talked to it? Got any photos?

Unless you can furnish evidence that Satan exists, why should anyone beleive you? This is the pickle you're in -- making statements without evidence to back them up.

Me, on the other hand, why should I have to prove that Satan does not exist? If I can't prove that Satan does not exist, does that mean that he does exist? Nope.

So, you're the one in the pickle, not me. You alleged Satan exists, not me. If you want to be taken seriously, you can supply the evidence.

[Tock]

Addressing the second part of your text first:


The fundamental problem with what is stated above is simply that of a STANDARD, you don't have one! Without standards terms like "Very ethical" and "Greatest good" are meaningless. What you posit is no different than saying you're the "Greatest/Best" student without using a grading system, such an honor only belongs to the valedictorian because his/her grades were compared to all others. Sure you could say that you're a "Very" good basketball player, but where is the standard for comparision...all kindergarteners in your zip code? The local YMCA? The Streetball tour bus? The European MVP trophy? The college player of the year award? The NBA MVP trophy? What???

Without a barometer all comparison breaks down, and this is where you are with "Very ethical" and "Greatest good"...NOWHERE!

I suppose you consider the Bible to be an appropriate ethical standard?

What do you think of the Bible when it says that people who violate these six of the Ten Commandments must be put to death? Is this an ethical standard for everyone to comply with?

7 Thou shalt have none other gods before me.

8 Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth:
11 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.
18 Neither shalt thou commit adultery.

Or do you agree with the Bible that heathens, engravers, cussers, sabbath breakers, and adulterers should be put to death?
IMHO, such a punishment is a bit extreme. Agree?

================================================== =======

You might be releived to know that lots of cultures have thrived without the "guidance" offered by the Bible.

American Indians did very well for thousands of years, until, of course, the arrival of the Christian "white man" who stole their land, gave them plagues, and forced them onto reservations. And ancient Greece survived for centuries, as did Phoenicia, Egypt, and India and China (for several thousands of years), and Japan.
Ancient Rome did rather well also, acquiring wealth and splendor, but its decline and fall matched the rise of the number of Christians in its territories.

So, it's quite evident that cultures can do quite well without the moral encumberance of the Bible. In fact, they can probably do much better.

[Tock]

Are there any extra-Biblical records?

Flavius Josephus (37-97 AD), court historian for Emperor Vespasian:

"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders." (Arabic translation)

Not so quick, mon ami. More than one version of Josephus' history exists. And here's the story behind that story:

http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...ally_live.html

In the closing years of the first century, Josephus, the celebrated Jewish historian, wrote his famous work on "The Antiquities of the Jews." In this work, the historian made no mention of Christ, and for two hundred years after the death of Josephus, the name of Christ did not appear in his history. There were no printing presses in those days. Books were multiplied by being copied. It was, therefore, easy to add to or change what an author had written. The church felt that Josephus ought to recognize Christ, and the dead historian was made to do it. In the fourth century, a copy of "The Antiquities of the Jews" appeared, in which occurred this passage: "Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works; a teacher of such men as received the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."
Such is the celebrated reference to Christ in Josephus. A more brazen forgery was never perpetrated. For more than two hundred years, the Christian Fathers who were familiar with the works of Josephus knew nothing of this passage. Had the passage been in the works of Josephus which they knew, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen an Clement of Alexandria would have been eager to hurl it at their Jewish opponents in their many controversies. But it did not exist. Indeed, Origen, who knew his Josephus well, expressly affirmed that that writer had not acknowledged Christ. This passage first appeared in the writings of the Christian Father Eusebius, the first historian of Christianity, early in the fourth century; and it is believed that he was its author. Eusebius, who not only advocated fraud in the interest of the faith, but who is know to have tampered with passages in the works of Josephus and several other writers, introduces this passage in his "Evangelical Demonstration," (Book III., p.124), in these words: "Certainly the attestations I have already produced concerning our Savior may be sufficient. However, it may not be amiss, if, over and above, we make use of Josephus the Jew for a further witness."
Everything demonstrates the spurious character of the passage. It is written in the style of Eusebius, and not in the style of Josephus. Josephus was a voluminous writer. He wrote extensively about men of minor importance. The brevity of this reference to Christ is, therefore, a strong argument for its falsity. This passage interrupts the narrative. It has nothing to do with what precedes or what follows it; and its position clearly shows that the text of the historian has been separated by a later hand to give it room. Josephus was a Jew -- a priest of the religion of Moses. This passage makes him acknowledge the divinity, the miracles, and the resurrection of Christ -- that is to say, it makes an orthodox Jew talk like a believing Christian! Josephus could not possibly have written these words without being logically compelled to embrace Christianity. All the arguments of history and of reason unite in the conclusive proof that the passage is an unblushing forgery.
For these reasons every honest Christian scholar has abandoned it as an interpolation. Dean Milman says: "It is interpolated with many additional clauses." Dean Farrar, writing in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, says: "That Josephus wrote the whole passage as it now stands no sane critic can believe." Bishop Warburton denounced it as "a rank forgery and a very stupid one, too." Chambers' Encyclopaedia says: "The famous passage of Josephus is generally conceded to be an interpolation."
In the "Annals" of Tacitus, the Roman historian, there is another short passage which speaks of "Christus" as being the founder of a party called Christians -- a body of people "who were abhorred for their crimes." These words occur in Tacitus' account of the burning of Rome. The evidence for this passage is not much stronger than that for the passage in Josephus. It was not quoted by any writer before the fifteenth century; and when it was quoted, there was only one copy of the "Annals" in the world; and that copy was supposed to have been made in the eighth century -- six hundred years after Tacitus' death. The "Annals" were published between 115 and 117 A.D., nearly a century after Jesus' time -- so the passage, even if genuine, would not prove anything as to Jesus.
The name "Jesus" was as common among the Jews as is William or George with us. In the writings of Josephus, we find accounts of a number of Jesuses. One was Jesus, the son of Sapphias, the founder of a seditious band of mariners; another was Jesus, the captain of the robbers whose followers fled when they heard of his arrest; still another Jesus was a monomaniac who for seven years went about Jerusalem, crying, "Woe, woe, woe unto Jerusalem!" who was bruised and beaten many times, but offered no resistance; and who was finally killed with a stone at the siege of Jerusalem.
The word "Christ," the Greek equivalent of the Jewish word "Messiah," was not a personal name; it was a title; it meant "the Anointed One."
The Jews were looking for a Messiah, a successful political leader, who would restore the independence of their nation. Josephus tells us of many men who posed as Messiahs, who obtained a following among the people, and who were put to death by the Romans for political reasons. One of these Messiahs, or Christs, a Samaritan prophet, was executed under Pontius Pilate; and so great was the indignation of the Jews that Pilate had to be recalled by the Roman government.



There's more at the weblink, if you care to look. There's more to the historicity aspect of all this than what you've been told . . .
If you care to look, you'll be quite astonished, I'm sure . . .

[Kingweb50]

Tock...I was just wondering how you came about all of your thoughts on this as a kid did you go to church all the time and grow to hate it or do you still go to church and study the bible? Im just asking cause you seem to be knowledgable about the subject in both ways Im assuming.

[Tock]

Tock...I was just wondering how you came about all of your thoughts on this as a kid did you go to church all the time and grow to hate it or do you still go to church and study the bible? Im just asking cause you seem to be knowledgable about the subject in both ways Im assuming.

I never went to church until I was 15, but started going because a local church needed a piano player, and I love captive audiences.
Along the way, I paid attention to sermons and read lots & lots about fundamentalist theology and the Bible, and bought into that approach to religion. I had planned to become a minister after a stint in the USAF, but while in the military I discovered that I'm gay. My church didn't want any part of me after they heard that news, so I started going to the Metropolitan Community church here in Dallas. I tried to enroll in the Dallas Theological Seminary, but they asked me what church I belonged to, and when I told them, they threw me out. So, I figured the ministry wasn't for me after all.
Meanwhile, I kept reading up on Bible stuff, I taught Sunday School, too. But I had heard some criticisms of fundamentalist theology, and some of those criticisms made sense (which disturbed me greatly). So, I set about to see if I could disprove those things, and the more I looked into them, the worse things looked. I also found some stuff about atheism, and the more I looked at that, the more sense that made . . .
So I had a lot of conflicting notions circulating through my mind . . .

I began to question not only my faith, but the Bible itself. The more I read up on (both sides of the historicity of the bible, the more I doubted that the bible was indeed the result of the Universe's Creator talking to humans. Meanwhile, lots of TV evangelists and Republican politicians were bad-mouthing gays, basing their sentiments on the Bible. I started to refute some of their BS in local newspapers (letters to the editor, opinion pieces, etc) and the more I had to do that, the less I liked either fundamentalists or Republicans. And I've been doing all that for, um, 20 years or so.

But over the past few years, I've begun to appreciate the solace and comfort that a liberal approach to religion can be. I have some Episcopalian friends who seem happy with their church. Their clergy take an approach to the Bible that I'm unfamiliar with; it seems they are more interested in following Jesus' teachings, instead of rigidly conforming to the strict dictates of the bible.
That approach seems to work for them. And maybe one of these days I'll even attend a church service . . .

Meanwhile, I'm very skeptical of the legalistic, fundamentalist approach to religion espoused by many outspoken Christians. And, if they're willing to speak up on behalf of their more obnoxious opinions, I'm certainly willing to speak up and show the shortcomings of their theology.

[sonnygll]

I never went to church until I was 15, but started going because a local church needed a piano player, and I love captive audiences.
Along the way, I paid attention to sermons and read lots & lots about fundamentalist theology and the Bible, and bought into that approach to religion. I had planned to become a minister after a stint in the USAF, but while in the military I discovered that I'm gay. My church didn't want any part of me after they heard that news, so I started going to the Metropolitan Community church here in Dallas. I tried to enroll in the Dallas Theological Seminary, but they asked me what church I belonged to, and when I told them, they threw me out. So, I figured the ministry wasn't for me after all.
Meanwhile, I kept reading up on Bible stuff, I taught Sunday School, too. But I had heard some criticisms of fundamentalist theology, and some of those criticisms made sense (which disturbed me greatly). So, I set about to see if I could disprove those things, and the more I looked into them, the worse things looked. I also found some stuff about atheism, and the more I looked at that, the more sense that made . . .
So I had a lot of conflicting notions circulating through my mind . . .

I began to question not only my faith, but the Bible itself. The more I read up on (both sides of the historicity of the bible, the more I doubted that the bible was indeed the result of the Universe's Creator talking to humans. Meanwhile, lots of TV evangelists and Republican politicians were bad-mouthing gays, basing their sentiments on the Bible. I started to refute some of their BS in local newspapers (letters to the editor, opinion pieces, etc) and the more I had to do that, the less I liked either fundamentalists or Republicans. And I've been doing all that for, um, 20 years or so.

But over the past few years, I've begun to appreciate the solace and comfort that a liberal approach to religion can be. I have some Episcopalian friends who seem happy with their church. Their clergy take an approach to the Bible that I'm unfamiliar with; it seems they are more interested in following Jesus' teachings, instead of rigidly conforming to the strict dictates of the bible.
That approach seems to work for them. And maybe one of these days I'll even attend a church service . . .

Meanwhile, I'm very skeptical of the legalistic, fundamentalist approach to religion espoused by many outspoken Christians. And, if they're willing to speak up on behalf of their more obnoxious opinions, I'm certainly willing to speak up and show the shortcomings of their theology.

Ah, well that answers my questions from the other thread. Yea, I read the bible all the way through and that kind of helped ruin it for me. Generally religious people just read the bible cliff notes.

You know, those people are right though. God really does hate homosexuals. In the bible it does say you should be stoned to death. Along with disobedient children and other such great evils. Fortunately most people are too civilized to do such things.

Have you ever read the God Delusion by Richard Dawkins? It's a favorite of mine, highly recommended if you haven't read it yet.

[sonnygll]

Addressing the second part of your text first:


The fundamental problem with what is stated above is simply that of a STANDARD, you don't have one! Without standards terms like "Very ethical" and "Greatest good" are meaningless. What you posit is no different than saying you're the "Greatest/Best" student without using a grading system, such an honor only belongs to the valedictorian because his/her grades were compared to all others. Sure you could say that you're a "Very" good basketball player, but where is the standard for comparision...all kindergarteners in your zip code? The local YMCA? The Streetball tour bus? The European MVP trophy? The college player of the year award? The NBA MVP trophy? What???

Without a barometer all comparison breaks down, and this is where you are with "Very ethical" and "Greatest good"...NOWHERE!

--------------------------------
It is apparent that you read very little if any of this thread, as your post makes me sound like a rambling religious fanatic rather than a rational mind that believes in Christ. The problem here is obviously your contention that reason and Christ are diametrically opposed.
Let's take a look below.


I'm EXTREMELY open-minded, but you're not putting anything into mine...PLEASE build a case for me.
In other words, GIVE me something to believe, or at least disprove what I do.

For example, I say there is a God and a Satan, you and Tock hold the opposite stance which puts us both in a pickle without proof.

• GOD: Well, I tender that the world itself, which no scientist worth his lab coat would assert merely came into existence, is testimony of God as well as the life, death, and resurrection of Christ whom we KNOW lived because of Biblical and extra-Biblical account. Just as we know Harod and Ramseys did.
  
  
• SATAN: By your account evil is a mere superstition...that sounds a lot like a brush off to me. How do you not acknowledge the abundance of NEGATIVE supernatural activity throughout the world from real witchcraft, voodoo and hoodoo to demonic possession (and please play the mental illness card, which could never do what people in these states have done).

For instance, (meaning I do NOT believe this), neither of us can TRULY use our physical senses to detect (much like God). How could you convince me otherwise? You'd indicate the signs, or the things that the mentally ill do that are inconsistent with those of healthy people. Now given enough inconsistencies, and especially if done prolifically (both measures used in the DSM IV), having no other definitive cause, I'd have to agree. For evaluation and diagnosis, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders primarily considers: the acts or behaviors; their intensity (mild, moderate, severe or profound); and frequency. Isn’t ODD that such scientific reasoning is not extended to Christ?

Jesus certainly existed making the ONLY REAL question, “Was He mere man, or God?” Well He claimed to be God which itself hints towards craziness…a la the God-Complex. But somehow He fulfills each criterion in grand fashion…I use the same logic here as above, let’s take a scientific look:
His actions and behaviors include clearly supernatural miracles.
The intensity of these miracles was profound healing the sick, diseased, blind, and lame including raising the dead.
Frequency exhibits great proficiency (never failed with a person), and astounding prolificacy (number of accounts are remarkable)

...the rest as they say is His-Story.

Sound reasonable? That only leaves one loose end…

The sole possible argument to the contrary is that of source information. Surely the protagonist of His own book will be made to into a hero. Even Matt Damon can be super agent in his own movie trilogy. So, as mentioned above, how do we KNOW without doubt that Harod and Ramseys truly existed and did what is credited them, or for that matter George Washington and Abe Lincoln? There is no photographical evidence of existence, or video footage of their acts as their lives predate such technology. But we safely TRUST in their existence and works because of collaborative multi-source accounts. So a fanatic as you described above, would be Biblically bound, whereas a reasoning man and seeker of truth would search for corroboration.

Are there any extra-Biblical records?

And if so, there should certainly be A LOT FOR SO GREAT A MAN/GOD! This is where evolution plummets, we can find dinosaurs but where are all these missing links (between species) and millions of years of evolving ape-like civilizations? Well they don’t exist but this is quietly overlooked…some science! But I digress, back to other accounts of Jesus, His works, followers, as well as signs that SUPPOSEDLY occurred during His death. Even a little research will reveal volumes...here's a start:

ANCIENT NON-CHRISTIAN SOURCES

Flavius Josephus (37-97 AD), court historian for Emperor Vespasian:
"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders." (Arabic translation)
-------------------------------
Julius Africanus, writing around 221 AD, found a reference in the writings of Thallus, who wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean around 52 AD, which dealt with the supernatural darkness that covered the land during Jesus's crucifixion:
-------------------------------

Cornelius Tacitus (55-120 AD), "the greatest historian" of ancient Rome:
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."
-----------------------
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, chief secretary of Emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD):
"Because the Jews of Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, [Claudius] expelled them from the city."
"After the great fire at Rome [during Nero's reign] ... Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief, led by one who did great miracles in all lands that could not be explained."
----------------------
Pliny the Younger, Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor around 112 AD:
"[The Christians] were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind." Pliny added that Christianity attracted persons of all societal ranks, all ages, both sexes, and from both the city and the country. Late in his letter to Emperor Trajan, Pliny refers to the teachings of Jesus and his followers as excessive and contagious superstition.
---------------------------
Emperor Trajan, in reply to Pliny:
"The method you have pursued, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those denounced to you as Christians is extremely proper. It is not possible to lay down any general rule which can be applied as the fixed standard in all cases of this nature. No search should be made for these people; when they are denounced and found guilty they must be punished; with the restriction, however, that when the party denies himself to be a Christian, and shall give proof that he is not (that is, by adoring our gods) he shall be pardoned on the ground of repentance, even though he may have formerly incurred suspicion. Informations without the accuser's name subscribed must not be admitted in evidence against anyone, as it is introducing a very dangerous precedent, and by no means agreeable to the spirit of the age."
------------------------------
Emporer Hadrian (117-138 AD), in a letter to Minucius Fundanus, the Asian proconsul:
"I do not wish, therefore, that the matter should be passed by without examination, so that these men may neither be harassed, nor opportunity of malicious proceedings be offered to informers. If, therefore, the provincials can clearly evince their charges against the Christians, so as to answer before the tribunal, let them pursue this course only, but not by mere petitions, and mere outcries against the Christians. For it is far more proper, if anyone would bring an accusation, that you should examine it." Hadrian further explained that if Christians were found guilty they should be judged "according to the heinousness of the crime." If the accusers were only slandering the believers, then those who inaccurately made the charges were to be punished.
--------------------------
The Jewish Talmud, compiled between 70 and 200 AD:
"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover."
[Another early reference in the Talmud speaks of five of Jesus's disciples and recounts their standing before judges who make individual decisions about each one, deciding that they should be executed. However, no actual deaths are recorded.]
------------------------------
Lucian, a second century Greek satirist:
"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. ... You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, who did truly and inexplicably disappear from the well guarded tomb…was He really God? All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property." Lucian also reported that the Christians had "sacred writings" which were frequently read. When something affected them, "they spare no trouble, no expense."
------------------------------
Mara Bar-Serapion, of Syria, writing between 70 and 200 AD from prison to motivate his son to emulate wise teachers of the past:
"What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burying Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the teaching of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given."

GNOSTICS SOURCES

The Gospel of Truth, probably by Valentius, around 135-160 AD:
"For when they had seen him and had heard him, he granted them to taste him and to smell him and to touch the beloved Son. When he had appeared instructing them about the Father. ... For he came by means of fleshly appearance." Other passages affirm that the Son of God came in the flesh and "the Word came into the midst. ... it became a body."
"Jesus, was patient in accepting sufferings. . . since he knows that his death is life for many. . . . he was nailed to a tree; he published the edict of the Father on the cross. ... He draws himself down to death through life. ... eternal clothes him. Having stripped himself of the perishable rags, he put on imperishability, which no one can possibly take away from him."
---------------------------------------
The Aprocryphon of John, probably by Saturninus, around 120-130 AD:
"It happened one day when John, the brother of James,--who are the sons of Zebedee--went up and came to the temple, that a Pharisee named Arimanius approached him and said to him, `Where is your master whom you followed?' And he said to him, 'He has gone to the place from which he came.' The Pharisee said to him, 'This Nazarene deceived you with deception and filled your ears with lies and closed your hearts and turned you from the traditions of your fathers.'"
---------------------------------
The Gospel of Thomas, probably from 140-200 AD:
Contain many references to and alleged quotations of Jesus.
--------------------------------
The Treatise On Resurrection, by uncertain author of the late second century, to Rheginos:
"The Lord ... existed in flesh and ... revealed himself as Son of God ... Now the Son of God, Rheginos, was Son of Man. He embraced them both, possessing the humanity and the divinity, so that on the one hand he might vanquish death through his being Son of God, and that on the other through the Son of Man the restoration to the Pleroma might occur; because he was originally from above, a seed of the Truth, before this structure of the cosmos had come into being."
"For we have known the Son of Man, and we have believed that he rose from among the dead. This is he of whom we say, 'He became the destruction of death, as he is a great one in whom they believe.' Great are those who believe."
"The Savior swallowed up death. ... He transformed himself into an imperishable Aeon and raised himself up, having swallowed the visible by the invisible, and he gave us the way of our immortality."
"Do not think the resurrection is an illusion. It is no illusion, but it is truth. Indeed, it is more fitting to say that the world is an illusion, rather than the resurrection which has come into being through our Lord the Savior, Jesus Christ."
". . . already you have the resurrection ... why not consider yourself as risen and already brought to this?" Rheginos was thus encouraged not to "continue as if you are to die."
-----------------------------------

LOST WORKS QUOTED IN OTHER SOURCES

Acts of Pontius Pilate, reports sent from Pilate to Tiberius, referred to by Justin Martyr (150 AD):
"And the expression, 'They pierced my hands and my feet,' was used in reference to the nails of the cross which were fixed in His hands and feet. And after he was crucified, they cast lots upon His vesture, and they that crucified Him parted it among them. And that these things did happen you can ascertain the 'Acts' of Pontius Pilate." Later Justin lists several healing miracles and asserts, "And that He did those things, you can learn from the Acts of Pontius Pilate."
-------------------------------
Phlegon, born about 80 AD, as reported by Origen (185-254 AD), mentions that Jesus made certain predictions which were all fulfilled.
--------------------------------

ANCIENT CHRISTIAN SOURCES
(extra-biblical)

Clement, elder of Rome, letter to the Corinthian church (95 AD):
"The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent forth from God. So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both therefore came of the will of God in the appointed order. Having therefore received a charge, and having been fully assured through the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and confirmed in the word of God with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth with the glad tidings that the kingdom of God should come. So preaching everywhere in country and town, they appointed their firstfruits, when they had proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons unto them that should believe."
--------------------------------
Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, letter to the Trallians (110-115 AD):
"Jesus Christ who was of the race of David, who was the Son of Mary, who was truly born and ate and drank, was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, was truly crucified and died in the sight of those in heaven and on earth and those under the earth; who moreover was truly raised from the dead, His Father having raised Him, who in the like fashion will so raise us also who believe on Him."
-------------------------------
Ignatius, letter to the Smyrneans (110-115 AD):
"He is truly of the race of David according to the flesh, but Son of God by the Divine will and power, truly born of a virgin and baptised by John that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him, truly nailed up in the flesh for our sakes under Pontius Pilate and Herod the tetrarch (of which fruit are we--that is, of his most blessed passion); that He might set up an ensign unto all ages through His resurrection."
"For I know and believe that He was in the flesh even after the resurrection; and when He came to Peter and his company, He said to them, 'Lay hold and handle me, and see that I am not a demon without body.' And straightway they touched him, and they believed, being joined unto His flesh and His blood. Wherefore also they despised death, nay they were found superior to death. And after His resurrection He ate with them and drank with them."
-------------------------------
Ignatius, letter to the Magnesians (110-115 AD):
"Be ye fully persuaded concerning the birth and the passion and the resurrection, which took place in the time of the governorship of Pontius Pilate; for these things were truly and certainly done by Jesus Christ our hope."
-------------------------------
Quadratus, to Emperor Hadrian about 125 AD:
"The deeds of our Saviour were always before you, for they were true miracles; those that were healed, those that were raised from the dead, who were seen, not only when healed and when raised, but were always present. They remained living a long time, not only whilst our Lord was on earth, but likewise when He had left the earth. So that some of them have also lived to our own times."
-------------------------------
Barnabas, written 130-138 AD:
"He must needs be manifested in the flesh. ... He preached teaching Israel and performing so many wonders and miracles, and He loved them exceedingly. ... He chose His own apostles who were to proclaim His Gospel. ... But He Himself desired so to suffer; for it was necessary for Him to suffer on a tree."
---------------------------------
Justin Martyr, to Emperor Antoninus Pius about 150 AD:
After referring to Jesus's birth of a virgin in the town of Bethlehem, and that His physical line of descent came through the tribe of Judah and the family of Jesse, Justin wrote, "Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, in which Jesus Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registers of the taxing made under Cyrenius, your first procurator in Judea."
"Accordingly, after He was crucified, even all His acquaintances forsook Him, having denied Him; and afterwards, when He had risen from the dead and appeared to them, and had taught them to read the prophecies in which all these things were foretold as coming to pass, and when they had seen Him ascending into heaven, and had believed, and had received power sent thence by Him upon them, and went to every race of men, they taught these things, and were called apostles."
----------------------------------
Justin Martyr, in Dialogue with Trypho, around 150 AD:
"For at the time of His birth, Magi who came from Arabia worshipped Him, coming first to Herod, who then was sovereign in your land."
"For when they crucified Him, driving in the nails, they pierced His hands and feet; and those who crucified Him parted His garments among themselves, each casting lots for what he chose to have, and receiving according to the decision of the lot."
"Christ said amongst you that He would give the sign of Jonah, exhorting you to repent of your wicked deeds at least after He rose again from the dead ... yet you not only have not repented, after you learned that He rose from the dead, but, as I said before, you have sent chosen and ordained men throughout all the world to proclaim that 'a godless and lawless heresy had sprung from one Jesus, a Galilean deceiver, whom we crucified, but His disciples stole Him by night from the tomb, where He was laid when unfastened from the cross, and now deceive men by asserting that He has risen from the dead and ascended to heaven.'"
"For indeed the Lord remained upon the tree almost until evening, and they buried Him at eventide; then on the third day He rose again."
-------------------------------

The real issue of the resurrection deals with its evidence. This evidence consists of the testimony of many people who stated that they had seen Jesus after His crucifixion and death. The same people who testified of the resurrection of Christ also gave up their social and economic security and put their lives on the line in order proclaim that Jesus had risen. Does it make any sense at all to say that they knew Jesus did not rise from the dead and had concocted an elaborate plan in order to deceive a great many people into believing that Jesus had risen? Why would they do that? Does it also make any sense that they would continue in this lie while being persecuted, ostracized from family and friends, beaten, imprisoned, and finally killed for what they believed?

It makes more sense to believe that their actions were consistent with their teaching. In other words, they taught about self-sacrifice, dedication to truth, love, peace, etc., and they based it all on the risen Lord. It was based upon the truth that they had seen.

Actually I do have a standard. It is the same standard we are all born with. Unless someone is mentally ill or has some sort of other emotional problems they have this too. Think about it, you pick and choose which parts of the bible are good and which parts are bad. The message of love and kindness you grasp onto because you know it's good. However I am sure you don't think wiping out a whole group of people in a flood is ok. Or committing genocide against different tribes, forcing people to eat their children, tell your chosen people which criteria to use for taking slaves and so on. You ignore the vengeance and ruthless cruelty because you know it's wrong. Everyone has always known that. It didn't come from the bible. So either people have an inborn sense of right and wrong or genocide is ok in certain circumstances. You can't have it both ways.

To go at it from another way. If there was no god to keep you in line, would you go around stealing and killing people? I really don't think you would.

I actually did read much of the thread. I did skim some of your propaganda, but mostly I read it.

Well obviously you aren't going to think you are close minded on the subject. To you it seems perfectly rational.

That's as far as I am going to go however. Like I said it just wouldn't be right. I really just posted for 2 simple reasons. First to show my support for the opposition. Second to state that it would do no good, and just be cruel to try to ruin your faith.



One more thing I almost forgot, is to explain "greatest good". That simply means in any situation to do the most good. For example when they dropped the bomb on Japan to end world war 2. While many people died, even more would have died if they had gone on with the invasion. Or like the regular guys that fought in that war, that gave their lives so untold billions would be free of Nazi domination. It is simply the better choice of any moral dilemma. But which is the better choice, is made by our sense of ethics I mentioned earlier.

[magic32]

Sadly, a personal standard is anything but!
As exhibited from toddlerhood (first choices) to twilight years, people will often skirt righteousness.

[sonnygll]

Sadly, a personal standard is anything but!
As exhibited from toddlerhood (first choices) to twilight years, people will often skirt righteousness.

Toddlers don't have the understanding yet. Children are completely self centered at that age because they don't have an understanding of what other people are. So their way will only work in their sphere of understanding.

Now if you mean religious morality, that doesn't otherwise make sense. Then yea, I'll agree to that. All of the sexual morality in particular are arbitrary rules that come from the bible. Or whichever book is used depending on the religion.

For example, I wouldn't cheat on a wife or girlfriend, or just trick a woman to use her for sex. That hurts another person. However I have no problem having casual sex including oral and anal, or strokin it to some porn.


So in the bible it says you should stone a man to death if he lies with another man. So, could you, Magic, stone Tock to death?

You kind of avoided some of my points earlier. But that's ok, I'm not going to force the issue.

[magic32]

WASTING TIME WITH SCOFFERS IS UNWISE AND MOST WASTEFUL, I'M ONLY HERE TO HELP THOSE WHO SEEK UNDERSTANDING WITH REGARD TO BIBLICAL QUESTIONS. SO SOME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN OMITTED FROM MY RADAR.

NOW TO ADDRESS WHAT YOU POSED:

Toddlers don't have the understanding yet. Children are completely self centered at that age because they don't have an understanding of what other people are. So their way will only work in their sphere of understanding.
TRUE, BUT WHY? YOU SEEM TO ACCEPT THIS AS NECESSITY, AND ALSO TO MINIMIZE IT AS MERELY SELF-CENTERED WHEN IT ACTUALLY GOES, MUCH DEEPER.
WHY IS MAN EVEN FROM THE BEGINNING SELF-CENTERED? DISOBEDIENT? LAW BREAKING?
THE BIBLE SAYS IT’S THE SIN NATURE, UNDERWHICH WE ARE BORN.

Now if you mean religious morality, that doesn't otherwise make sense. Then yea, I'll agree to that. All of the sexual morality in particular are arbitrary rules that come from the bible. Or whichever book is used depending on the religion.
I THINK YOU MEAN SEXUAL IMMORALITY, BUT IT CAN'T BE ARBITRARY IF GOD EXISTS AND CREATED ALL THINGS, THEN IT BECOMES COMMANDMENT. THIS IS WHY MANY DON'T FOLLOW BIBLICAL LAWS...THEY DON'T WANT TO BE COMMANDED, AND YOU KNOW WHAT, THAT'S THEIR PERROGATIVE.

For example, I wouldn't cheat on a wife or girlfriend, or just trick a woman to use her for sex. That hurts another person. However I have no problem having casual sex including oral and anal, or strokin it to some porn.
RIGHT & WRONG ARE NOT MERELY ABOUT HURTING ANOTHER PERSON...MORALITY AND CHRISTIANITY ARE NOT SYNONYMS:

MORALITY SAYS DO WHAT IS RIGHT, BUT HAS NO STANDARD FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS, WHICH LEAVES MAN TO HIS OWN DEVICES.
CONVERSELY, CHRISTIANITY SAYS DO WHAT IS RIGHT, BASED ON THE BIBLE'S/CHRIST'S STANDARD OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.

So in the bible it says you should stone a man to death if he lies with another man. So, could you, Magic, stone Tock to death?
THAT'S IMPROPER DISCERNMENT. GOD HANDED DOWN DIFFERENT PARTS OF HIS LAW THROUGHOUT TIME UNTIL CHRIST'S FULFILLMENT. JUST AS YOU'D REPRIMAND A CHILD FOR ATTEMPTING TO DRIVE, THEN BUY THEM A CAR ON THE 16TH B-DAY.
JESUS SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED YOUR ISSUE AGREEING WITH THE LAW, THEY DESERVE TO BE STONED, BUT EXTENDING MERCY.

• Jhn 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

JUSTICE - U GET WHAT YOU DESERVE
GRACE - U GET WHAT YOU DON'T DESERVE
MERCY - U DON'T GET WHAT YOU DESERVE

You kind of avoided some of my points earlier. But that's ok, I'm not going to force the issue.
PLEASE REITERATE THEM, BUT NOTE THAT I'M NOT HERE TO ARGUE OR DEAL WITH THOSE WHO DON'T CARE ABOUT THE WORD.

[Tock]

WASTING TIME WITH SCOFFERS IS UNWISE AND MOST WASTEFUL

Especially if you're not up to responding to critical analysis of the Bible.


1) The first 5 books of the Bible are anonymous; nobody knows who wrote them. (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy)

2) Everybody likes the 10 Commandments, thinks they ought to be displayed in schools, courtrooms, etc. But, nobody knows that they say:

Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
And in Exodus 22:20, it calls for the death penalty for anyone who breaks this rule. 20: He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
And if you say something that someone considers to be blasphemy, then you're gonna be put to DEATH: Leviticus 24:16 -- And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the LORD, shall be put to death.



Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth
And just look at all those engravings on those paper dollars in your wallets. Each and every one violates this Commandment.

Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
How many times a day does the average American do this?
Who really cares?

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work

Exodus 35:02 requires DEATH for anyone who transgresses this Commandment: Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death.
Does anyone take this seriously? Not really. So, if you're not going to take this part of the Bible seriously, why take any of it seriously?

Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Cool, no problem here, so long as your father and mother didn't horribly abuse you. No sense in honoring sexually abusive parents. But if you don't, brace yourself for the consequenses given in Leviticus 20:9 -- For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
Again, if you support the Ten Commandments because they're in the Bible, then you support DEATH for kids who curse their abusive parents, because that's in the Bible, too. Unless, of course, you champion "Cafeteria Theology," where you "pick and choose" what parts of the Bible you decide to follow.

Thou shalt not kill.
No problem here.

Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Depends on what you call adultery, I guess.
The Bible allows for polygamy, within limits. Leviticus 20:14, for example, says you can have a harem, but you can't have both a mother and her daughter: And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you.
But it clearly calls for DEATH to anyone who commits adultery: (Leviticus 20:10) And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.


Thou shalt not steal.
Again, no problem here. Don't take my stuff, and we won't chop off your hand.

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Ya, lying against your neighbor isn't cool.
Only problem is, this doesn't cover folks who live across town, or in a foreign country. IMHO, it doesn't go quite far enough.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.
Wanting what your neighbor has is the major reason why we work long hours, and is the major incentive for Americans to contribute to our national economy. Stop Americans from coveting, and the economy will collapse, and we'll go back to an agrarian subsistance economy. Lots of people think this is a good idea, by the way, but how about you?



Ya, the Ten Commandments come from the Book of Exodus. Is that a sacred text that everyone should obey? Yes? Then it might interest you to know some other "sacred" texts also found in that book:
Exodus 22:18 -- Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
Exodus 21:16 -- And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.

But, if you look long enough in the Bible (as in most any book, I suppose), you'll find useful things, like Leviticus 15:19, where menstruating women are required to go away for one week -- And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even. and Ephesians 5:22-24 requires wives to be submissive to their husbands:
22: Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23: For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
24: Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Why? It's because women are the weaker sex, according to I Peter 3:7--
Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
and as such, women can not have any authority over men, as the Bible says in I Timothy 2:12 -- But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
:


Sure, the Bible says lots of things. But do they make sense? Not really. Conservative theologians will tell you that the Bible is the Word of God because of what it says in II Timothy 3:16 -- "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" But, is that particular verse "Inspired Scripture" just because the writer says that it is? If that's the way you differentiate between "True Scripture" and general BS, then keep watch for the "Gospel of Tock." It'll be a doozy.

Anyway, beleive what you want. But you may as well know that not everything that you might beleive in, is true.

[Tock]

Sadly, a personal standard is anything but!
As exhibited from toddlerhood (first choices) to twilight years, people will often skirt righteousness.

As we all know, just because you claim to have a Biblical standard of morality (or even if you actually do), that doesn't mean that you're any better than anyone else.

Take for example:

All those wretched Christians who burnt heretics at the stake between 1300 AD and 1850 AD in the Inquisition.

All those wretched Christians who complied with the Biblical rule, "Thou shalt not permit a witch to live."

TV evangelist Jimmy Swaggart, who spent years on nationwide TV bewailing "sexual immorality" but was discovered in a cheap Louisiana motel patronizing cheap whores.

Rev. Terry Hornbuckle of Arlington, TX, who on Aug. 22, 2006, was found guilty of drugging and raping three women. Two of the three women were members of his church.

An "ex-gay" Christian counselor was recently found guilty of sexually assaulting another man -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=315164

A pastor was accused of raping a woman in order to cast out her demons -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=314581

The San Diego Catholic Diocese agreed to pay $198 million to settle 144 child abuse claims -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=314074

Religious polygamists kick out teen-age boys so that there will be plenty girls to go around to the Christian old men -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=314123

A Christian and anti-gay US Senator (Larry Craig) was arrested for soliciting gay sex in a public rest room -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=312948

Republican US Senator David Vitter caught doing business with prostitutes -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=307916

Baptist preacher calls for DEATH to anyone who criticizes his tax-exempt status -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=311965

Senseless deaths in stupid exorcism -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=309945

Republican National leader caught performing oral sex on youth -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=310882

Republican National leader admits raping a girl -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=310891

[helium3]

now we are talking some sense, we are all going to hell lol.

really it doesnt matter how strict we follow the bible or any other religious text, we are all still recking the planet one way or another, and for that we should either burn in hell or make it right.

[magic32]

now we are talking some sense, we are all going to hell lol.

really it doesnt matter how strict we follow the bible or any other religious text, we are all still recking the planet one way or another, and for that we should either burn in hell or make it right.

Come on Helium, would you punish a child for playing with a toy that you gave them? Playing, using, living on or in causes wear. Or were the owners of all cars in all the junkyards of the world, bad owners? Physical things, bodies included simply weren’t meant to last forever, and I’m sure God acknowledges this, and maybe even built it in, to help with moving on.

Now I’m not saying we (humanity) were great stewards of the earth, but poor the stewardship of the planet is never mentioned in the Bible as warranting Hellfire.

[magic32]

As we all know, just because you claim to have a Biblical standard of morality (or even if you actually do), that doesn't mean that you're any better than anyone else.

Take for example:

All those wretched Christians who burnt heretics at the stake between 1300 AD and 1850 AD in the Inquisition.

All those wretched Christians who complied with the Biblical rule, "Thou shalt not permit a witch to live."

TV evangelist Jimmy Swaggart, who spent years on nationwide TV bewailing "sexual immorality" but was discovered in a cheap Louisiana motel patronizing cheap whores.

Rev. Terry Hornbuckle of Arlington, TX, who on Aug. 22, 2006, was found guilty of drugging and raping three women. Two of the three women were members of his church.

An "ex-gay" Christian counselor was recently found guilty of sexually assaulting another man -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=315164

A pastor was accused of raping a woman in order to cast out her demons -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=314581

The San Diego Catholic Diocese agreed to pay $198 million to settle 144 child abuse claims -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=314074

Religious polygamists kick out teen-age boys so that there will be plenty girls to go around to the Christian old men -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=314123

A Christian and anti-gay US Senator (Larry Craig) was arrested for soliciting gay sex in a public rest room -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=312948

Republican US Senator David Vitter caught doing business with prostitutes -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=307916

Baptist preacher calls for DEATH to anyone who criticizes his tax-exempt status -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=311965

Senseless deaths in stupid exorcism -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=309945

Republican National leader caught performing oral sex on youth -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=310882

Republican National leader admits raping a girl -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=310891

You can't be serious???

I don't believe you took the time to reference this garbage. You obviously haven't been paying attention.

This has nothing to do with the Bible. Just because someone claims to be a Christian doesn't mean they are, thus their actions are immaterial. And even if they are Christians, using the great televangelist scandals, they are still men and STILL flawed.

We don't look to man, as our model, we look to Christ. And please don't pull out that illegitimate Christ had sex with Mary and Martha crap. That would be beneath you.

[magic32]

Why, then, do so many anti-gay Christians quote the anti-gay laws from the Old Testament?

OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE SUCH LAWS ALIGN WITH THEIR AGENDA/MOVEMENT.

But tell me this --> what do you think of the New Testament laws, like the ones I mentioned in I Cor. 11 (Men may not have long hair, Women may not have short hair, Rules about wearing hats while praying) or I Tim. (Women can't braid their hair or wear jewelry)?
I’LL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, BUT THEN LISTEN TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY, BECAUSE IT IS THE CUSP OF YOUR ISSUE.


IN PAUL’S FIRST LETTER TO THE CORINTHIANS, HE DID ADDRESS BOTH HATS AND HAIR IN I COR. 11:14&15, BUT HAD YOU ACTUALLY READ THE LETTER YOU’D UNDERSTAND ITS CONTEXT. NAMELY, THE CHURCH AT CORINTH, THOUGH LAW FOLLOWERS, WERE DISORDERLY.

• 1Cr 11:18For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.

THE WOMEN WERE DOMINATING, AND THE MEN WERE SLACK IN THEIR CHARGE OF AUTHORITY. NOW SOME MIGHT SAY, WHAT’S WRONG WITH THAT? IT’S UN-BIBLICAL!
GOD IS A GOD OF ORDER AND HE CREATED MAN TO GOVERN THE EARTH NOT BE GOVERNED BY WOMEN AND CHILDREN. NOW WOMEN’S LIBBERS DETEST THIS, BUT THE CREATOR HAS EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE HERE, SO TAKE IT UP WITH HIM. GOD MIMICKED EARTHLY ORDER AFTER HEAVENLY ORDER:
1) GOD THE FATHER – FATHER
2) GOD THE SON – MOTHER
3) GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT - CHILD

AS SUCH PAUL STARTS THE LETTER BY DOCUMENTING THE ORDER OF AUTHORITY:

• 1Cr 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.
  
• 1Cr 11:8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
• 1Cr 11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man

.

THEN GOES ON TO LIST SOME OF THE SIGNS OF A LOSS OF ORDER/REVERENCE. AND AGAIN YOUR QUOTE WAS INCORRECT, HE WASN’T SAYING SHE HAS TO LIVE WITH HER HEAD COVERED HE SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO WORSHIP AND PRAYER.

• 1Cr 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

AND HE DIDN’T SAY A MAN MUST HAVE SHORT HAIR, BUT IT BLURS THE MALE/FEMALE LINE BECAUSE A WOMAN’S LONG HAIR IS HER GLORY.

• 1Cr 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.

YOU ARE AN INTELLIGENT PERSON, AND I BELIEVE THAT A PART OF YOU REALLY WANTS THE TRUTH, BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON YOU DENY YOURSELF. GOD WOULD HAVE YOU EITHER SEEK FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING CONVERTED OR TO LEAVE HIS WORD ALONE AND ENJOY (AND ‘YES’ IT IS PLEASURABLE, BUT SO BRIEF) THE SINFUL LIFE. HERE ARE HIS WORDS ON THE MATTER:

• Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
• Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

Seems to me that if you're gonna say that Faith in Jesus is enough for salvation, even for a human riddled with imperfection, then it really doesn't matter what those imperfections are, whether they be homosexuality, or if they be any other sin.
EXACTLY!


It seems to me that an application of Christian Fundamentalist theology, unbiased by homophobic BS, would declare that John 3:16 (For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotton son that WHOSOEVER beleives in Him should not perish but have everlasting life) covers not only Christians who smoke, tell the occasional "little white lie," or drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, but also covers Christians who are gay with spouses. It seems that way to me, but I'm sure it won't seem that way to other Christians. I'm sure that other Christians will not be able to give up their self-righteous self-assurance that their own minor sins are not as vile to God as someone else's homosexuality, and therefore God must not consider gay people capable of being as forgiven as they themselves are.
EXACTLY!
NOW YOU’RE BECOMING REDUNDANT, THIS WAS ADDRESSED IN POST #222 AS A RESPONSE TO YOU.


IMHO, it seems to me that only a Christian with the sensibility of a Pharasee would have the temerity to declare who God has forgiven and who He hasn't. Especially when the founder of your religion has made the qualifications for salvation so easy.

Keep in mind -- John 3:16 says,
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
not,
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that heterosexuals who believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

TRUE BUT TO CONTINUE IN SIN IS EVIDENCE OF DISBELIEF, AND THE WAGES OF SIN IS DEATH. REMEMBER, GOD LOOKS INTO THE HEARTS OF MAN, SO THERE’S NO FOOLING HIM.

• 1Ki 8:39 Then hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and forgive, and do, and give to every man according to his ways, whose heart thou knowest; (for thou, [even] thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men
• 2Ch 6:30 Then hear thou from heaven thy dwelling place, and forgive, and render unto every man according unto all his ways, whose heart thou knowest; (for thou only knowest the hearts of the children of men
• Pro 21:2 Every way of a man [is] right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.

Ah, yes . . . those are the people Jesus had in mind when He said, "how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?" (Matthew 7:4)

Tsk tsk tsk . . . Don't you know your own Theology?
MAKES NO SENSE, BUT SEEMS TO EMPOWER YOU SO HAVE IT.

IN THE FUTURE I WILL ONLY SPEAK WITH YOU ABOUT MATTERS OF SALVATION, AS FOR THE REST YOU SHOULD READ THE WORD "IN CONTEXT" BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER CONTROVERSIAL SEGMENTS. I'M SURE YOU'LL UNDERSTAND THEM THEN, ALSO YOU HAVE LOGAN AND THE FELLAS.

[Tock]

Republican US Senator David Vitter caught doing business with prostitutes -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=307916

Baptist preacher calls for DEATH to anyone who criticizes his tax-exempt status -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=311965

Senseless deaths in stupid exorcism -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=309945

Republican National leader caught performing oral sex on youth -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=310882

Republican National leader admits raping a girl -- http://forums.steroid.com/showthread.php?t=310891

You can't be serious???

I don't believe you took the time to reference this garbage. You obviously haven't been paying attention.

This has nothing to do with the Bible. Just because someone claims to be a Christian doesn't mean they are, thus their actions are immaterial. And even if they are Christians, using the great televangelist scandals, they are still men and STILL flawed.

Christian Evangelicals and Republican leaders hold its Christian leaders up as an example for others to follow; they contrast their "right living" with the depravity exhibited by many Democrats. People who allegedly follow the Christian standard of living are supposed to be morally better than people who do not.
What I've done here is demonstrate that that assumption is not true. Perhaps someday all those televangelists will admit that they're no closer to God, that they're not a whit better or holier than you or I am.