But the truth of the matter regarding the obvious and continuous increase of sin, evil, and death in our current world (all of which, unfortunately, contains a plethora of views that tend to reject God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ) does not allow the "coexist" mantra to lead anyone to absolute truth, salvation of the soul, reconciliation with God, or eternity with our Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ.
My blogging friend Neil over at Eternity Matters has a good post up and at the end of it I noticed the following graphic that explains the truth of the lie behind the "coexist" movement:
The graphic below and to the right, further explains the contradictions of the coexist movement. [Right click on graphic to enlarge.]
John 14:6 explains why they can't all be true:
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. - John 14:6 (NKJV)
Hat tip:
Eternity Matters
Posts
29 comments:
You are correct in saying that ”the 'coexist' mantra to lead anyone to absolute truth, salvation of the soul, reconciliation with God, or eternity with...Jesus Christ.” Many of those other views incline toward absolute truth, reconciliation with some other deity, and eternity with that deity.
But from a historical view, religions only manage to 'coexist' when there are a lot of them in one area.
Where there are only two or three, they will soon be at each others' throats. Islam and Christianity are both determined that only their beliefs shall reign supreme; Buddhists and Hindus aren't regarded as a threat, except perhaps by each other.
The destruction of some ancient Buddhist structures by the Taliban several years ago speaks volumes about their idea of coexistence. Even though Islam speaks of destroying Jews, it should also be remembered that it was a supposedly Christian country that built Auschwitz and Dachau. Not many calls for coexistence there, either.
As for the graphic, I see what you did there: “Gay Rights” is neither a religion nor a creed, as the other examples are. There is no First Church of St. Priapus, no Tribadist Sisterhood. Conflating gays with religious creeds is underhandedness of the worst kind, especially as many of them pray to the same Gods you (and others) do. Pacifists also have a right to defend themselves, and many of them do. But they stop once their opponent is either down or gone. Unlike the Abrahamic creeds with their “Religion of Peace” and their “Prince of Peace”, pacifists usually know just when and where to stop.
When you feel that only you have the “right” answer, you don't want to hear any view that challenges that assumption. And it is an assumption: if any gods anywhere have ever put in an appearance to anyone, it was so long ago that there is no accurate memory of it. None of them have reappeared since.
Anubis and Vesta, Kuan Yin and Morrigu, Buxcenus and Marduk, Coyote and Dagon, Sirtumu and Izanagi...all were once great, and all of them are gone. Yahweh and Allah will eventually follow them.
Ironically, that graphic precisely defines why such coexistence is almost impossible to achieve: because at their core all are mutually exclusive. It then goes on to prove it by quoting the exclusivity of one deific belief.
Not a single existing religion tolerates coexistence with a competing belief. Not one ever has.
"Being at each other's throats" may be true in some cases, but our Constitutional Republic (or, what it used to be) was designed to tolerate other religions. Dangerous cults should not fall into the same category of tolerance and warning people about them is protected under free speech laws. Still, people are free to believe what they want - even though they may be seriously wrong.
Islam is a religion that tries to get people to succomb via terror and threats.
Christianity is nothing like that.
The invitation is given in millions of Christian churches across the U.S. each Sunday and so people of their own free will (while the Holy Spirit of God is knocking on the door of their hearts) confess and repent of their sins and ask Jesus into their hearts as Lord and Savior.
Your attempt to equate Islam and Christianity is flawed - extremely flawed.
There is no such thing as a "Christian country." Hitler may have tried to use Christianity as some type of an excuse to create the Third Reich/Aryan race kill machine in the Holocaust slaughter of the Jews, Poles, homosexuals, and eventually the Soviets in WWII. Such evil ideology comes from the influence of Satan, not the love, grace, mercy and salvation provided through Christ. You always seem to forget that the Bible tells us that God doesn't rejoice in the destruction of wicked (we all sin and fall short - admittedly, some more agregiously than others) but wants ALL to come to repentance. Billions die ignoring or rejecting God's offer of salvation through Christ. So be it.
GM, you must know that I didn't create the graphic. The gay insignia was most likely done by people that you agree with. And, it is a sort of humanistic religion. They took God's rainbow symbolism from the Bible and used it to proclaim their human "right" to engage in sodomy.
Elite Progressives/liberals/socialists/communists/totalitarian/pro-dictator types usually try to present their beliefs in a "lets all just get along" lie in order to get control of the people they wish to quash under their militaristic boots.
GM, I don't "feel that I have the right answer." The Bible has the correct answer! Sharing that fact is not speculation, it is truth. Just because you don't like it or you don't choose to believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ doesn't make it untrue.
con't
It's ironic that you have taken the speculative position that "Yahweh and Allah will eventually follow" the false gods of the past. Such wishful thinking will turn to sorrow after your death; for you will then realize your grave error once you face Christ at the Great White Throne Judgment.
Christians will face God at the Judgment Seat of Christ - where we can claim that our trust in Jesus, our great Deliverer is why we are saved.
The fact that all religions cannot all be true is the reason why coexistence is a tough task to achieve. There are elements in it (like Islam) that won't allow the peaceful existence of Judaism or Christianity or even Hinduism. The Pakistanis Muslims hate all three and have been at war with nations practicing such religions for centuries.
Jews and Christians can coexist and, in fact, often support each other. Jesus was a Jew and when He appeared as the Messiah that was prophesied in the Old Testament, "The Way" was found for reconciliation back to God.
Christians believe in everything that the Jews believe in via the Old Testament (their Torah). The only difference is that many Jews are still awaiting the appearance of their Messiah (although Messianic Jews already accept Christ). At Christ's Second Coming, many Jews will then recognize Him as their long-awaited Messiah. Of course some Jews don't want to believe that Jesus was, is, and will be their Messiah. But we must not forget that Christ came first for the Jew, and then for the Gentile.
Well, I don't need to go on about all of this. I know where you stand on such issues so it's probably pointless. But the support for the Jews and Zionism in Israel by Christians in America and around the world is unshakable - for those who are genuinely born again in Christ, study the Bible, and follow the lead of the Holy Spirit of God.
The hatred and call for destruction of the Jews and the State of Israel goes back to Biblical times when the Abrahamic line through Isaac was given by God and the Ishmael line led to a "great nation" and the current Arabic line of descendants. The term "great" can mean large - but as we have seen the Arab culture is one of hatred for the Jews and Israel. I bring this up because after posting my comment here, I saw this article at Legal Insurrection:
More evidence it’s not about land for peace in Israel
Note the conclusion:
"Who knows if Olmert could have accomplished this deal if Abbas had accepted. The deal Olmert offered was insane from an Israeli perspective — but it tested whether there was a real peace partner on the other side. There wasn’t. Abbas and the Palestinian leadership walked away.
It’s always been about the refusal to accept Israel as a Jewish state.
When the Palestinians embrace people like Columbia University Professor Joseph Massad, with his theories that the Holocaust was a Zionist-Nazi collaboration, and the BDS movement embraces Islamists and other Jew haters, and there is anti-Jewish incitement in the Palestinian press, the refusal to accept Israel becomes an intellectual foundation of the Palestinian negotiating position from which Palestinian leaders dare not deviate.
It’s never been about land for peace, at most it’s been about land as a stepping stone to Israel’s demise. Until that truly changes, nothing else will change."
Professor Jacobsen is correct. And his view is backed up by Biblical prophecy:
Today, we are continually witnessing Biblical prophecy happening right before our very eyes!
As astounding as it was, the prophecies surrounding the rebirth of Israel did not stop with the declaration of Israel's independence in 1948.
Three thousand years ago God inspired King David to predict that the reborn nation of Israel would be immediately surrounded by enemies, including the Arab nations of Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria.
"For lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head. They have taken craftly counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee: The tabernacles of Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Hoab; and the Hagarenes; Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre; Assur also is joined with them: they have holpen the children of Lot. Selah" (Psalm 83:2-8).
In this incredible prophecy, David described the modern states of the Middle East by naming the ancient nations that have now joined with the Palestinians in their attempt to destroy the Jewish state in the last days.
More here: We Are Witnessing Biblical Prophecy
CJW: ”...you will then realize your grave error once you face Christ at the Great White Throne Judgment.
Christians will face God at the Judgment Seat of Christ - where we can claim that our trust in Jesus...is why we are saved.”
But I'm not a Christian, so exactly how does this Throne of Judgment or Judgment Seat apply to me? That's like penalizing me for drunk driving when I don't own a car and I'm allergic to booze!
”The fact that all religions cannot all be true is the reason why coexistence is a tough task to achieve.”
True. None of the religions can prove the truth of their claims, but all insist on that truth. Since they can't all be true, it's wiser to believe that none of them are until one of them can demonstrate it. Had you been born in Thailand, you'd almost certainly think that Buddha got it right, and be amused by all the Christians who traveled halfway around the planet in an attempt to convince you otherwise.
”Jews and Christians can coexist and, in fact, often support each other.”
Sure...but it's the times when they don't coexist that sort of...stand out. Take the original Jewish ghettos of Europe, for example. The ones in London and Birmingham and Leeds were destroyed in an orgy of burning and looting way back in 1189, when Richard I became king. King Edward I expelled all the Jews from England in 1290. So did King Ferdinand of Spain (yes, that King Ferdinand) in 1492.
We discussed Martin Luther long ago; there's no need to repeat his words here.
”Christians believe in everything that the Jews believe in via the Old Testament (their Torah). The only difference is that many Jews are still awaiting the appearance of their Messiah...”
No, they don't.
Christians don't generally circumcise their newborn male children, they tend to have a fondness for pork products, and they don't carry signs that say “Eat at Red Lobster®—BURN IN HELL”. There is no Christian equivalent to kosher foods. All that, and more, are based on Jewish beliefs going back at least 4500 years.
Also, most—not 'many' but most--say that their Messiah has not come. Joshua bar-Joseph was a great prophet, but he was not the one they've been waiting for.
”At Christ's Second Coming, many Jews will then recognize Him as their long-awaited Messiah.”
Well, that's just speculation on your part, isn't it? The Jews have dealt with Yahweh far longer than Christianity has even existed; what do you know about their god that they don't?
Nor did he come first for the Jew and then for the Gentile; according to his own words, he came exclusively for the Jews; I can read as well as you. That other eyewash came later on, from know-it-all Paul. Like all other religions past and present, Christianity is a creed of exclusivity, not universality.
Since you seem to want a protracted discussion, I'll give you one. More to come later.
”You always seem to forget that the Bible tells us that God doesn't rejoice in the destruction of wicked (we all sin and fall short - admittedly, some more agregiously than others) but wants ALL to come to repentance.”
I repeat my previous statement: If an all-powerful god WANTS something to happen, it will. If such a god does not want something to happen, it will not—in fact, it can not happen.
So: if your God wants all to come to repentance, then all will, without exception, and there is no need for any 'judgment' or any hell. But Christians claim that there WILL BE a judgment, and that there IS a hell. One can only conclude that either the claim of what God wants is a lie—or that the claims of God's power is a lie (i.e., not all-powerful).
I don't care which one you try to spin; I've made my decision.
(Incidentally, nearly all other religions preach some form of this, too. It still doesn't make it true.)
Yes, I know you didn't create the graphic. You chose to reproduce it though, so you obviously agree with it. It changes nothing: gay rights is still a political/social situation, not a religious one. I'll believe otherwise when the the Tribadist Sisterhood gets tax-exempt status and parking privileges like Liberty Baptist does.
'God's rainbow symbolism' is rather scary, viewed in context. All the years I lived in Hawaii, I saw rainbows every single day; was God telling the Hawaiians that he wouldn't drown them (again)?
”Elite Progressives/liberals/theists/socialists/conservatives/communists/nationalist/totalitarian/pro-dictator types usually try to present their beliefs in a "lets all just get along" lie in order to get control of the people they wish to quash under their militaristic boots.”
There, fixed that. 'Cause nobody believes in "let's all get along" more than religious types...
”GM, I don't "feel that I have the right answer." The Bible has the correct answer! Sharing that fact is not speculation, it is truth. Just because you don't like it or you don't choose to believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ doesn't make it untrue.”
Okay:
Who were the first visitors at Jesus' tomb?
So...what you are saying is that you want God to FORCE you to believe in Christ?
We are about to have dinner, but I will share one more thing.
The Great White Throne Judgment is the judgment for all non-believers who die with their sins upon their own souls and have chosen to reject Christ.
The Judgment Seat of Christ is for believers, who can claim their repentance of sin and belief and trust in Jesus as payment for the penalty of sin, and thus will be accepted into heaven. Rewards are distributed too, but you wouldn't care to know about that.
Again, when I explain further faith points here it is for the benefit of others who come to read. I know you have made your decision. You have stated it time and time again. But you still keep coming here and posting - for whatever reason you have in your own mind. So be it.
I agree with most of this, although I find it incredible that anyone could assume the Holocaust was a result of collaboration between Nazis and Zionists! I agree that with the Palestinians, it isn't just about the land; obviously they want Israel gone.
Of course, the Israelis have their own opinions on the matter. They claim, just as they did long ago, that this is the land their god gave to them (yes, yes, never mind that they had to kill all the people who were still living on it), and more importantly, they have nowhere else to go. The Israelis have shown several times over the decades that they'll fight for what's theirs, much to the sorrow of their enemies.
I don't feel like looking up your connections between the ancient nations and their modern equivalents, so I'll accept your word. Persia has always been Persia (Iran is a modern invention), and the same is true with Egypt and (As)Syria. But Amalek has been wiped from history, hasn't it? That's what I've been told.
The Philistines survive only as a metaphor; and Tyre, well...it was supposed to have been destroyed forever, but Jesus is said to have actually visited the place.
”Islam is a religion that tries to get people to succomb (sic) via terror and threats.
Christianity is nothing like that.”
You weren't expecting the Spanish Inquisition, were you?
Or the Catholic-Huguenot wars in France?
Or the “convert, leave, or die” trifecta the European Jews were often given?
Maybe Christianity isn't like that now, but that wasn't always the case. Islam is like that now, but that may not always be the case. (The Jews learned to tone it down, after all.) And given the right conditions, Christianity could always go back to that stance again.
You are confusing Roman Catholicism with Christianity. Roman Catholics were responsible for the Inquisition etc. Bible believing Christians are not responsible for these things, but the Roman Catholic church is. Stop blaming Christians for things that happened hundreds of years ago. The same old accusations have been answered over and over again.
Looks like this one didn't get through yesterday, so here it is again:
”So...what you are saying is that you want God to FORCE you to believe in Christ?”
I hope you're not going to tell me that God PERSUADED Saul to change his mind! Are you?
”The Great White Throne Judgment is the judgment for all non-believers who die with their sins upon their own souls and have chosen to reject Christ.
The Judgment Seat of Christ is for believers, who can claim their repentance of sin and belief and trust in Jesus as payment for the penalty of sin, and thus will be accepted into heaven. Rewards are distributed too, but you wouldn't care to know about that.”
So let me get this straight: a man like, oh...Mohandas Gandhi, who lived an exemplary life, who knew of yet rejected the Christian faith, gets judged and ruled against...and a man who, let's say, is involved in mass murder and is never caught by the authorities, dies decades later but converts in the final hours of his life--genuinely converts--will receive the keys to the city when he dies. Is that right?
I post for the same reason you do—for the benefit of others to read. There's two sided to every story, you know. BTW, thanks for acknowledging that what your God gives you is a reward, not a gift. Like a dog who gets a Milk-Bone for doing something, you have to do something to get the salvation or whatever: it's NOT a 'gift', and God doesn't give his love to just anybody. It's that 'exclusivity' business again.
So be it.
Hello, Anon.
You say I'm confusing Roman Catholicism with Christianity. Then perhaps you can tell us all: just when did Catholics stop believing in Christ? 'Cause I still see his image everywhere (there's a goodly number of Latinos in my neighborhood), he still seems to be part of the Holy Triangle, people still get baptized in his name, and so forth.
They wouldn't do that if Christ wasn't still part of the pantheon, would they? I know Christopher and some of the other saints got demoted, but surely not Jesus, right?
The Jewish Holocaust did not happen 'hundreds of years ago'. It happened barely 75 years ago. Do I need to point out that Germany, the instigator of that pogrom, was and is at least 40% Protestant (Lutheran)? All right, I will. Scandinavia is all Protestant, as is most of the UK. Some parts of Switzerland are too (the German-speaking parts), and Estonia and Latvia. Most of the former Warsaw Pact countries were originally Orthodox, and have gone back to it. Others, such as Poland and Hungary, have returned to Catholicism, France, Spain and Ireland, to name a few, have always been Catholic.
All of those countries have gone through spells of bullying their local Jews. I'm sure their Bibles all told them that it's bad juju to mess with the Chosen People™, but they just couldn't help themselves; there was something about that “killers of Christ” label that just pissed all those folks off. (At least, that was their excuse.)
The details described in my above posts are not accusations, they are facts, documented by those who committed them, and those who survived them.
Is that you, Sothenes? Nice to hear from you again.
GM,
Do you not understand that the "lost sheep" are the Jews that he was preaching to during his 3 year ministry? I don't know what kind of point you were trying to make, but the Gentiles were reached mostly via Paul and when the other disciples listened and obeyed Christ's command before his Ascension back to the Father where he instructed them to go out in all the world and preach the Gospel.
Of course, we know that many Jews rejected him. But others saw Jesus as the true Messiah and followed him.
John 5 is a great portion of Scripture where many questions are answered regarding just who Jesus is and that he was sent by the one true God of Israel.
Jhn 5:43 "I have come in My Father's name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive.
Jhn 5:44 "How can you believe, who receive honor from one another, and do not seek the honor that [comes] from the only God?
Jhn 5:45 "Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is [one] who accuses you--Moses, in whom you trust.
Jhn 5:46 "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me.
Jhn 5:47 "But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?"
Regarding Saul becoming the apostle Paul. Recall that Saul was persecuting and killing Christians. His personal conversion on the road to Damascus was unique and dramatic. Paul was chosen by Christ, (one of the most unlikely persons to be converted to The Way) for an eternal purpose. All that Paul went through created the letters that he wrote from prison. You see, there was a greater purpose for which Paul was "in chains."
The prophets of the Old Testament were chosen to present special messages (like end time prophets which include Ezekiel, Daniel, Jeremiah and others, and then John in the New Testament book of Revelation). Certain individuals were given assignments to accomplish certain things (like Moses leading the Israelites out of captivity in Egypt in the OT, and John the Baptist announcing the arrival of Jesus the Messiah). So were certain individuals like Paul paramount to spreading the message of the Gospel, and via his writings included in God's Word, Paul has reached millions for Christ.
con't
Regarding Ghandi, are you trying to say that he never sinned? Confession and repentance is the key to salvation. I thought you already knew that. Guess you forgot.
Regarding "rewards" vs. "gifts." You are confusing two different subjects that occur in the Bible at different times .
Read Romans 6 and especially this verse:
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin [is] death, but the gift of God [is] eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
The rewards happen in heaven and are related to the work that believers had done while on earth. The Bible also talks about the 24 elders being given crowns, however, such crowns are tossed at the feet of Jesus because only He is worthy.
Rev 4:10 the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying:
Rev 4:11 "You are worthy, O Lord, [fn] To receive glory and honor and power; For You created all things, And by Your will they exist [fn] and were created."
The booklet/study guide written by Dr. David Jeremiah - Revealing the Mysteries of Heaven - explains in great detail, using Scripture, what believers will be doing in heaven and on earth during the Millennium. It's only $10.00 plus shipping, but I think that every person should read it.
The need to "do something" is incorrect. Christ has already done it all for us. What each person needs to answer is Christ's question, "who do you say that I am? Accepting Christ's gift of salvation through repentance via what Christ has already done for us on the Cross at Calvary is a decision to be made; not something to do.
I neglected to share this verse:
Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, [fn] for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.
Yes, Paul and the others did preach to the Gentiles, supposedly on the command of Jesus. But that was the risen Jesus talking. The earthly Jesus cared nothing for the Gentiles, saying that he was sent only to the Jews.
While he was in the tomb, he apparently had time to reconsider, coming to the conclusion that his words would play better among the Gentiles than among his “lost sheep”.
You gave a pretty good explanation, but you didn't answer the question directly. Did God FORCE himself upon Saul, or not?
No, I am not saying, or trying to say, that Gandhi never sinned. By Christian standards, and by Hindi standards as well, I'm sure he did. I'm sure my theoretical mass murderer may have been kind to those who were not his designated victims. But one gets to confess with his dying breaths and wipe away his bloody past, while his victims remain just as dead. The other guy, even though he never harmed anyone, gets thrown down the chute because he supposedly rejected the 'right' god. That's what I'm saying.
”Regarding 'rewards' vs. 'gifts'. You are confusing two different subjects that occur in the Bible at different times.”
No, I'm talking about two different conditions as the result of two different requirements.
A reward is received when a requirement has been met.
Run the fastest race = get the gold medal.
Earn straight As = become an honor student.
Kill the dragon = marry the princess.
Answer Christ's question = get saved.
Of course the question has to be answered correctly! But you said it yourself: “What each person needs to answer is Christ's question.” You defined it as “a decision to be made; not something to do”, but even making a decision is doing something. The requirement is met, and the reward is received.
Gifts have no such requirements. You simply say “Here, have this,” and that's all. You don't have to know the person, or even like them, to give them a gift. Rewards are actively sought; gifts are not, and often come unexpectedly.
Regarding Rom 1:16: it wasn't Jesus who said that, was it? Those were Paul's words. I repeat: Jesus said that he came for the Jews alone.
GM,
Has anyone ever told you that you think too much sometimes? It would help if for once you would "be still and know that He is God." But of course you'd say, "been there, done that." If you experienced a genuine conversion at the time, then you are saved. You may be considered a "backslidden Christian" because of your current atheistic beliefs, but the doctrine of once saved always saved applies.
The difference between someone who is backslidden (for whatever reason) vs. someone who never accepted Christ as Lord and Savior is huge. Then, there are those who "pretend" to be Christians but never were in the first place. That could be you, too. Only God knows your true heart and thus your ultimate destination. I and other Christians can only surmise your spiritual condition according to what you write here on this blog.
A gift must be accepted and received in order to be applied...doesn't it? I think that you continually like to think of yourself as "reasoning" yourself out of believing. But there is a spiritual battle going on behind the scenes - and it's being fought for your very own soul.
About your question. Christ confronted Paul directly and challenged him on his persecution of Jesus and his followers. That's a pretty powerful persuasive technique, but ultimately, Saul had the opportunity to reject Christ even then - just like you are choosing to reject Christ now despite all of the evidence in the Bible and in other literature that Jesus died, rose from the dead, and ascended back unto the Father.
About Jesus coming for the Jew first, and then for the Gentiles.
The Old Testament pointed to Christ as Messiah. Jesus even told the Jews that Moses spoke of Him. Therefore, the entire Old Testament was written to point to Jesus Christ who would come as the Incarnate Messiah to save people from their sins. Therefore, Paul's words reflect what was already revealed by Christ who identified Himself as the long-awaited Jewish Messiah.
Jhn 5:46 "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me.
Those are Christ's words in John 5:46.
And 1 Timothy reveals that Jesus came for all sinners to repent.
1Ti 1:15
This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief.
Oh, Christine, how wonderful it would be to be told I 'think too much'! Trouble is, people who tell me that are nearly always people who don't think enough
There are those nonbelievers who say, “You can't reason yourself out of a belief that you didn't reason yourself into.” My own observations support this. Supernatural beliefs don't arise from reasoned thought—it's always an emotional opening. In the modern world (and almost certainly in the past, too), religion has its best chance among those who are emotionally open to it; the grieving widow, the suddenly-unemployed, the shell-shocked soldier, the bankrupted businessman.
Any reasonable explanation for those beliefs are made by the professional men, and those schooled in apologetics like yourself. Among yourselves, you all know why you believe, but you often stumble when trying to explain it to someone outside your circle.
You claim to adhere to the “faith of our fathers” but you spend much time and money trying to convince the Muslim or the Hindu or the tribalist to abandon the faith of his fathers, and switch his loyalty to yours. Historically, that has only worked by conquest.
”...you are choosing to reject Christ now despite all of the evidence in the Bible and in other literature that Jesus died, rose from the dead, and ascended back unto the Father.”
Eh?! Where outside the Bible does it say all that? It doesn't agree in all those parts even inside the Bible!
The behavior of the thieves who were executed with him is disputed. His last words are described along a different timeline, depending on who tells it. It's not agreed on what time he was executed, or how long he was in the borrowed tomb; it's not agreed on who first came to the grave and found him missing.
His disciples believed only after they saw him again. Thomas wasn't satisfied until he actually touched him (good for him!). Oddly enough, Jesus' enemies feared he might come back, yet he never appeared before Caiaphas and the other Sanhedrin; one wonders why.
Jesus arrived in stealth, as a mere babe in a cave; he left just as stealthily, with only his closest associates to witness his ascension. Now if he'd done it in front of the temple in Jerusalem, with hundreds of witnesses, that would have been far more credible than those 500 people whom Paul says saw him. Remember, Paul didn't see the departure himself, nor did he say how he learned about those 500 people, or where they saw him.
”The Old Testament pointed to Christ as Messiah...Paul's words reflect what was already revealed by Christ who identified Himself as the long-awaited Jewish Messiah.“
Okay, then you can point me to (as you like to say) book, chapter and verse where Moses clearly identifies Joshua bar-Joseph as the long-awaited Anointed One. All I have to say about it is something you probably heard in Joisey: If you have to tell people how great you are...you're probably not.
Even the passage from Timothy comes decades later, after The Legend had begun to grow. But it certainly says nothing in Jesus' own words; that “of whom I am chief” is Timothy describing himself. Jesus likened the Gentiles to dogs.
Hm, I've posted twice. Not that it matters much--you'll have lost interest by now anyway.
Enjoy the holiday.
GM,
All you needed to do was a search for Is There Any Evidence For Jesus Outside The Bible. Why so lazy?
You have a tendency to misuse words in Scripture in order to put forth a lie. The discussion about dogs at the link you provided has nothing to do with "Jesus likened the Gentiles to dogs."
However, in the 22nd chapter of the book of Revelation, we find a metaphor about dogs describing where the unsaved end up in eternity:
Rev 22:15
But [fn] outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.
Rev 22:16
“I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.”
People have been trying to disprove the Bible for centuries. The naysayers are often proven wrong when another prophecy comes true right before our eyes. Yet, they don't correct themselves.
There are fictional writers (like Dan Brown of The Da Vinci Code) who try to pass off their imaginatory tales as genuine. He, and other like him, have failed miserably.
I don't know what you read that leads you to erroneously believe that "Paul couldn't have written 1st and 2nd Timothy."
BTW, Paul wrote these letters to Timothy, so he was describing himself - Paul as a now saved - but former great sinner - "of whom I am (Paul) chief."
Paul wrote this because he remembered his life before he met Christ. The more he understood God's grace, the more he was aware of his own sinfulness. Like Paul, we are all sinners saved by grace. Humility and gratitude about the mercy of God stays with us all the days of our lives.
Moses wrote Genesis and when he wrote Genesis 1:26, notice the "our image" in the text.
Gen 1:26
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all [fn] the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
Moses was identifying God the Father, Jesus Christ (pre-incarnate), and the Holy Spirit in the "our image" declaration.
Using Jesus' own words will perhaps explain why he didn't appear before the Jews that rejected him:
Luk 16:31
“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”
Jhn 6:64
“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him.
Meant to write "imaginary," but perhaps a new word (imaginatory) could emerge in the dictionary someday to describe "imagine a story!" Ha!
P.S. I deleted the double post.
”You have a tendency to misuse words in Scripture in order to put forth a lie. The discussion about dogs at the link you provided has nothing to do with "Jesus likened the Gentiles to dogs."
The woman was a Canaanite, from the region of Tyre (or Sidon). I can't say for certain, but I'm sure you'll correct me, if she was not Hebrew herself. Given the context of the story, it may be implied that she was not. Anyway, you know the tale: she came to Jesus, begging that he come and expel a demon from her daughter. He does not respond. The disciples, annoyed by her pleas, ask Jesus to send her away, and his answer seems to confirm his self-declared mission: ”I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
The woman comes once again, kneeling at Jesus' feet and crying for his aid. He replies “It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to the dogs."
Symbolically, he is the “bread”, and not to be used to nourish the “dogs”--that is, Gentiles, who are of course any non-Jews.
I took this straight from the NIV (Mat 15: 21~26), since that's the edition you prefer. If you have a different interpretation, please present it.
”I don't know what you read that leads you to erroneously believe that 'Paul couldn't have written 1st and 2nd Timothy.'"
Then I'll tell you. I read it here.
Forums.catholic.com has a thread on it as well, which includes this:
"NAB Commentary.
From the late second century to the nineteenth, Pauline authorship of the three Pastoral Epistles (First and Second Timothy and the letter to Titus) went unchallenged. Since then, the attribution of these letters to Paul has been questioned. Most scholars are convinced that Paul could not have been responsible for the vocabulary and style, the concept of church organization, or the theological expressions found in these letters. A second group believes, on the basis of statistical evidence, that the vocabulary and style are Pauline, even if at first sight the contrary seems to be the case. They state that the concept of church organization in the letters is not as advanced as the questioners of Pauline authorship hold since the notion of hierarchical order in a religious community existed in Israel before the time of Christ, as evidenced in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Finally, this group sees affinities between the theological thought of the Pastorals and that of the unquestionably genuine letters of Paul. Other scholars, while conceding a degree of validity to the positions mentioned above, suggest that the apostle made use of a secretary who was responsible for the composition of the letters. A fourth group of scholars believes that these letters are the work of a compiler, that they are based on traditions about Paul in his later years, and that they include, in varying amounts, actual fragments of genuine Pauline correspondence.
If Paul is to be considered the more immediate author, the Pastorals are to be dated between the end of his first Roman imprisonment (Acts 28,16) and his execution under Nero (A.D. 63-67); if they are regarded as only more remotely Pauline, their date may be as late as the early second century. In spite of these problems of authorship and dating, the Pastorals are illustrative of early Christian life and remain an important element of canonical scripture." (emphasis mine)
Neither view is of concern to me personally. It only matters to Christians, and only some of them, it seems.
Addendum:
Mark 7:24~30 corroborates this story, although it leaves out Jesus's 'Israelites-only' declaration. Here, as in Matthew, the 'dogs' metaphor is used.
I don't expect an apology from you, but I would like some clarification.
GM,
If the truth be told here, then you would need to admit to the fact that you are not really here questioning this portion of Scripture for the purpose of "looking for some clarification." It is more likely that you are trying to set me up, stump me, contradict what I write, and take glee in pointing out any errors that I might make. Or, perhaps you take joy in just trying to make me look stupid? Whatever your real motivation, it is certainly not to gain "some clarification." So you know where you can shove that lie.
For the purpose of sharing the truth for others who may be reading here, I will quote what scholars (much more learned in Christian Apologetics than I) have written in the notes section of the Life Application Bible NIV version:
Notes on Matthew 15:24 -
"Jesus' words do not contradict the truth that God's message is for all people (Psalm 22:27; Isaiah 56:7; Matthew 28:19, Romans 15:9-12). After all, when Jesus said these words, he was in Gentile territory on a mission to Gentile people. He ministered to Gentiles on many other occasions also. Jesus was simply telling the woman that Jews were to have the first opportunity to accept him as the Messiah because God wanted them to present the message of salvation to the rest of the world (see Genesis 12:3). Jesus was not rejecting the Canaanite woman. He may have wanted to test her faith, or he may have wanted to use the situation as another opportunity to teach that faith is available to all people.
Notes on Matthew 15:26-28 -
Dog was a term the Jews commonly applied to Gentiles because the Jews considered these pagan people no more likely than dogs to receive God's blessing. Jesus was not degrading the woman by using this term, he was reflecting the Jews attitude so as to contrast it with his own. The woman did not argue. Instead, using Jesus' choice of words, she agreed to be considered a dog as long as she could receive God's blessing for her daughter. Ironically, many Jews would lose God's blessing and salvation because they rejected Jesus, and many Gentiles would find salvation because they recognized and accepted him."
If I were to have said those words to you, I'd have been lectured how 'hateful' and 'anti-God' I was, among other things. I'm going to ignore them, because you wouldn't be saying them now if some of what I wrote wasn't effective.
And yes, “clarification” is the word. Pretend I'm just another Hindu or Santerian or Shintoist, who has heard of your religion but has no real cause to believe in it. Verbal abuse won't get you very far with them, so try to explain it to me as you would one of them. After all, I don't know anything about your God either...not like you do. All I know is what I read in the book.
I get 1,440 chances every day to look stupid, and so do you. So does everyone else. You don't need my help for that.
All right, I read your link. I also think you're trying to derail this thread, but the challenge is accepted.
I think the comparison of Jesus's life and JFK's death was a poor one. There is no question that Kennedy is dead; the manner of his death is not in dispute. There were many, many eyewitnesses and they all have their own impressions, but there is no question that Kennedy is dead. Now, if someone were to claim that he is still alive (and would be in his mid-90s if he were), I would expect them to provide evidence for it, not to accept it on faith.
I have never claimed that Jesus didn't exist—I just doubt many of the deeds attributed to him.
None of the people whom he helped came to his defense before Pontius Pilate. The leper, the blind man, the fellow posessed by devils, the sisters of Lazarus (or Lazarus himself), the Canaanite woman, the grieving mother whose son was resurrected by Jesus on the way to the grave—all of them first-hand witnesses, all of them in a position to know--all of them able to testify absolutely to the truth—all are silent.
The ascension of Jesus into the air is certainly well known. Paul speaks of it, and of the 500 others who saw it. He didn't see it himself, but that's okay. But we have no account from any of those five hundred. Even if none of them could read or write, some of them must have known someone who could; but their accounts, if any, are lost to us. Matthew and John, who travelled with Jesus for three years and more, don't even describe the ascension. Weren't they there? Didn't they see it, too?
As I said above, neither Caiaphas nor any of the other elders saw Jesus after his sentencing even though he told them he'd be back. Imagine the witnesses they would have made!
Luk 16:31
“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”
But at least two people were risen from the dead, and both were conveniently absent at Jesus's trial. Having been a living(!) example of Jesus's power, the young man of Nain's descent and Lazarus both disappear below the horizon, never to be heard from again. Dead men walking must have been a very common ocurrence in 1st-century Palestine, given how big a deal is made of it.
About the Canaanite woman, you quoted “He may have wanted to test her faith, or he may have wanted to use the situation as another opportunity to teach that faith is available to all people.”
He also may have just gotten up on the wrong side of the bed that day, or he may have just been acting like a jerk. (He is said to have been God and man, after all.) Either way, we don't know. What we do know is what he actually said. Most people consider it rather harsh talk to someone who actively sought his help.
As you may have noticed, I quote scholars, too. You discount their words only because I quote them.
There's more to say, but this is enough for now. Your move.
Awwww! Did your itty bitty feelings get hurt? What a crock...
Anyway, the truth hurts when a nemesis is proven wrong in his assertions.
You are not here to be my friend, GM. You are here to be an adversary. Many of my Christian friends who have posted comments over the years have pointed out that fact and have stated that they wonder why I continue to converse with you.
Jesus had harsh words at certain times (remember the verse where he says someone who would lead a child to sin would be better off with a millstone around his neck and thrown into the sea?) and for good reasons. He had harsh words for the Pharisees who stuck to the law and could not accept Jesus as Messiah because they were like "whitewashed tombs."
Because you are not here as a seeker of the truth, you are not gaining anything of significance in your life. Perhaps you need someone more learned than me to answer your questions.
When you insult Jesus Christ by writing, "He also may have just gotten up on the wrong side of the bed that day, or he may have just been acting like a jerk," that is even worse than insulting me or any other Christian. It proves that you are in the league of the "I AM imposters."
Pastor Miles McPherson has a new book out entitled, "God In The Mirror - Discovering Who You Were Created To Be."
Pastor Miles writes:
"Satan's plan is to turn God's image in you against God Himself by turning you into an I AM imposter. An I AM imposter is someone who has become his or her own god. Once the devil tricks you into changing your identity to be your own god, you'll start to think you can do fine without God, and that'll be the beginning of your self-destruction."
So far I have read seven chapters and it is an excellent book that reveals just what is meant by God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in Genesis 1:26 when They stated, "Let Us make man in our image."
A great review from the Amazon site:
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent read!, May 27, 2013
By Jeff Sullivan - See all my reviews This review is from: God in the Mirror: Discovering Who You Were Created to Be (Paperback)
Pastor Miles really breaks down how we are created to reflect God's glory, and how the enemy is hell bent on derailing us from God's special plans for our lives.
You need the help that is covered in that book. We all do.
Your move.
”You are not here to be my friend, GM. You are here to be an adversary.”
You have a remarkable grasp of the obvious, Christine. You've always known that I was not here under a false flag, pretending to be what I was not. I came to your original site because you made an argument that I thought was flawed. I came here because you invited me (and warned me with “You're probably going to HATE it.”)
What do you want me to do, leave? Don't hold your breath.
Yes, of course Jesus had some harsh words for the Pharisees, but they were legalistic clergy, holding to the letter of the laws and not allowing for the spirit in which they were written. That made them rather inflexible, and rather two-faced. But the Canaanite woman was neither. She came to Jesus in all sincerity, and was initially rebuffed. Is there any reason to think she deserved such scorn?
The gentlemen you quote weasel their way around this by saying Jesus “may have wanted to test her faith” (why?) or that he “may have wanted to use the situation as another opportunity to teach that faith is available to all people. (Didn't she demonstrate that merely by coming to him?)
If I have become my own god, as you and Miles McPherson claim, then I'm in big trouble. Since I don't believe in any gods, that means I can't believe in myself! I certainly can't do all the things gods traditionally do; I can't make flowers grow, or the sun stand still, or strike an army blind. I can't restore a three-day-old dead man, and I can't turn sticks into serpents. Even for the big one-- deciding who lives and who dies-- I'd need a gun, or at least a knife.
But I can forgive an enemy, and I can show sympathy and mercy, and I can impregnate a woman. I'd rather brag about those three than the rest, even if I were a god. I AM...not.
If your God has a special plan for my life, how would you know? Why would he tell Pastor Miles (or you) and not me? He told most of his champions personally, such as Moses, Noah, David, Jesus, and Paul. Pharaoh...not so much. Job...not so much. He had 'special plans' for them, too.
Maybe that's the point: you can be on one side of God's plans...or you can be on the other.
But that would be faith by fear, wouldn't it?
Bravo GM!
The Caananite woman WAS rewarded for her faith. Did you not read the following verse?
Mat 15:28 Then Jesus said to her, "Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted." And her daughter was healed at that moment.
GM wrote:
"If I have become my own god, as you and Miles McPherson claim, then I'm in big trouble."
True.
Attempting to take the place of God was what caused Lucifer's fall in the first place. Unfortunately, mankind is guilty of following in Lucifer's footsteps...even though some may not want to admit it.
GM wrote: "If your God has a special plan for my life, how would you know?"
I don't know - but He does.
GM wrote: "Why would he tell Pastor Miles (or you) and not me?"
God tells each of us through His Written Word, the Bible, His Living Word, Jesus Christ, and the Helper - the Holy Spirit. Ignoring or rejecting any one of these is why you are missing His message.
GM wrote: "Maybe that's the point: you can be on one side of God's plans...or you can be on the other."
True.
Satan influences your passion and your efforts to glorify yourself instead of God. This is all an attempt to redefine who you are.
Pastor Miles writes, "Satan knows self-glorification is the fastest and most direct path to self-destruction, because it is what destroyed him. The devil wants you to think that you can do what you want and, therefore, you can be like God --in control of your own life and independent of Him."
GM wrote: "But that would be faith by fear, wouldn't it?"
No, that would be the absence of faith and thus the rejection of God's love.
”The Caananite woman WAS rewarded for her faith. Did you not read the following verse?”
Of course I did. Note that the preceding verse (15:27) says something about 'even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from the master's table.” That implies that even as a 'dog' she was still entitled to something, even if it was only spillovers from the 'feast'. She actually rebuked him for that statement!
But why should she have needed to say that at all? Imagine if a doctor were to say such a thing to you if you came to him about your daughter!
”Satan influences your passion and your efforts to glorify yourself instead of God. This is all an attempt to redefine who you are.”
So...I should just 'be still' and let someone else tell me who I am, is that it? Mr. Miles says that Satan motivates me to glorify myself, while God wants me to glorify himself. I may or may not know who I am, but one thing I don't want to be is a theological ping-pong ball.
”Pastor Miles writes, 'Satan knows self-glorification is the fastest and most direct path to self-destruction, because it is what destroyed him.'
Except it hasn't, has it? Every Christian out there swears that Satan still “walketh about” and pulling the strings of everyone from your next-door neighbor to (insert disliked person or group here). Since Satan's actual destruction is set for some point in the far future, it's obvious that he's not destroyed yet, only demoted. Destroyed people can't do anything.
' The devil wants you to think that you can do what you want and, therefore, you can be like God --in control of your own life and independent of Him.'
How is it that God does what he wants? Because he has the power, that's why.
Even so, he has been thwarted at times by his puppets, who still manage to surprise him, despite his being all-powerful and all-knowing.
If I'm not in control of my own life, then someone else is! I already know that. First my parents had control, then the military did, then the corporations did (and do). In that respect, God is no different from them. But you and other Christians keep telling me that God doesn't want automatons. If God is in control of my life, then I'm no better than a wind-up toy. Toys don't worship their builder.
”GM: Maybe that's the point: you can be on one side of God's plans...or you can be on the other.
But that would be faith by fear, wouldn't it?”
CJW: “No, that would be the absence of faith and thus the rejection of God's love.”
Accepting God's love is the surest way to avoid hell (which God, in his love, created). That's where all the citizens of Jericho are, because of God's 'plan' for their lives. Godists always see the hand of the divine in everything that happens, whether it's a decline in stocks, victory in war, or a tornado in the next county; and we, to whom these things happen, never have a hand in them.
What a way to live!
If I'm my own god, and I don't believe in gods, then I guess I don't exis
Post a Comment