Unsaved?

[Padres1969]

I have some evangelical protestant friends who I discuss faith with. In a discussion about salvation, I asked them if they could be “unsaved,” using the example of a “saved” person committing murder. The question caught them off guard, but their response was that the person probably wasn’t really “saved” to begin with. This didn’t make sense to me, but I couldn’t think of a good way to try and point them in the right direction.
Any suggestions?

It’s funny I’ve been wanting to ask that exact question every summer to a group of very vocal street preachers at San Diego Comic Con. My wife and I go down there every year and there’s a group of incredibly vocal street preachers who ostensibly follow the born-again Protestant philosophy of once saved, always saved (typified by literally screaming John 3:16 at people). Yet they also inform everyone who engages them, including Christians, that they’re going to hell for their wicked ways.

Yet it makes no sense that someone who is saved, even by their standards, could also be going to “lake of fire” because they like to read comic books or watch a Hollywood blockbuster.

 

[Seekerjn316]

You either didn’t read my post no. 54, or you didn’t understand it.

There can be no further answer from me.

If the language in the bible was liturgical and mythical, the apostles were liars and deceivers, unable to understand what they witnessed or malicious enough to twist it to their ideals - which they died for. Well then, we can just all of us, christians I mean, remove all crosses from everywhere and go home.

Fran

I don’t understand how the unknown gospel writers “gospel narrative” makes the apostles “liars”. There is no evidence any of the authors of the four gospels even knew any apostles…they were written some 40-70 years after the death of Jesus of Nazareth. There simply are no “authentic” writings of any apostle…Paul is the only New Testament author we have that we can say “Paul wrote X, Y or Z”…no other NT authors are know by name…don’t see how what these unknown authors wrote calls any of the apostles liars…no evidence any apostle was involved.

 

[frangiuliano115]

It’s funny I’ve been wanting to ask that exact question every summer to a group of very vocal street preachers at San Diego Comic Con. My wife and I go down there every year and there’s a group of incredibly vocal street preachers who ostensibly follow the born-again Protestant philosophy of once saved, always saved (typified by literally screaming John 3:16 at people). Yet they also inform everyone who engages them, including Christians, that they’re going to hell for their wicked ways.

Yet it makes no sense that someone who is saved, even by their standards, could also be going to “lake of fire” because they like to read comic books or watch a Hollywood blockbuster.

They don’t sound like OSAS believers. Here’s why:

People who believe that you “accept” Christ, are born again and are not able to lose your salvation because Jesus said, I will not lose even one you (the father) have sent me" or something like that, I can’t look up the scripture, you can maybe. Also, there is a general concept that once you’re saved, you’re under the blood and forgiven everything without even having to ask.

So, you see, you could read all the comics you want to, you could watch any movie you want to without losing your salvation. It’s a bit more complicated but really there’s no need to understand it any better than that.

Also, I’d say that they almost don’t sound christian. Maybe they’re a weird cult. Who are they to decide who’s saved and who isn’t? They could see a person’s heart?

Why bother with them??

There’s a comix festival in a big town about 45 minutes from me. Every year for two weekends. It seems a bit demonic to me - sorry to have to sound like a batty person. Too much ugliness and too many people that seem lost to me. And I don’t mean that they can’t find their way back home!

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

I don’t understand how the unknown gospel writers “gospel narrative” makes the apostles “liars”. There is no evidence any of the authors of the four gospels even knew any apostles…they were written some 40-70 years after the death of Jesus of Nazareth. There simply are no “authentic” writings of any apostle…Paul is the only New Testament author we have that we can say “Paul wrote X, Y or Z”…no other NT authors are know by name…don’t see how what these unknown authors wrote calls any of the apostles liars…no evidence any apostle was involved.

Hi Seekerjn,

It’s difficult for me to understand how you could read my post no. 54 and then ask the above.

First of all, christianity hinges on Christ and not on the apostles - although they referred the story of salvation.

Second of all the truth of Christ hinges on the resurrection. You could just reread my post no. 54.

There’s no use getting into who wrote what gospel, or letter for that matter. Just quick: it’s pretty much accepted that Mathew, or Levi, wrote the gospel of Mathew. Mark was a friend of Peter and he must have written what Peter taught and told him about Jesus. Luke travelled with Paul and you said Paul seems authentic to you. John’s gospel is accepted by all biblical scholars and theologians as being written by John. John lived with Jesus for at least 3 years, possibly a bit more.

Oh. And I’d say they were written as early as 20 years after Jesus died and John much later, after the 70’s if I remember.

So this is how I think of it.

Ghandi died about 60 years ago. About 40 years after his death, some of his friends thought they’d write a book about him. A couple of them died before they could even start it but passed the information on. A couple of them actually did get to write a book.

In the book they say Ghandi was a great prophet. He healed people from blindness and performed many other miracles. They said they saw him “shine” and levitate and speak to a couple of dead people. They say he brought a few persons back to life. They say he forgave people’s sins. They say that he claimed to be God. Not a god. They write about how he CAME BACK TO LIFE and how they saw him and touched him and ate with him. They take the book and travel the known world to disperse the information. They don’t get rich from the book. They’re imprisoned, tortured and killed. They never change their story.

There are people still alive that knew or remembered Ghandi.

Let’s see. We know Ghandi didn’t do these things. Would you say the people who wrote the book expecting us to believe it were sane people??

I can’t add anything to this.

Fran

 

[TonyBS]

It’s funny I’ve been wanting to ask that exact question every summer to a group of very vocal street preachers at San Diego Comic Con. My wife and I go down there every year and there’s a group of incredibly vocal street preachers who ostensibly follow the born-again Protestant philosophy of once saved, always saved (typified by literally screaming John 3:16 at people). Yet they also inform everyone who engages them, including Christians, that they’re going to hell for their wicked ways.

Yet it makes no sense that someone who is saved, even by their standards, could also be going to “lake of fire” because they like to read comic books or watch a Hollywood blockbuster.

Each has to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not.

One has to consider why Christ was to Return. If the World thinks that Materialism has not gripped each and every person on this planet in one way or another and if one thinks that it in not a very pernicious influence keeping us from knowing and loving God. Then it will be a hard road forward to all in this life.

Christ foretold how depraved the end of Times would be. It would be common sense to consider we are at that Juncture of Times.

God Bless and Regards Tony

God Bless and Regards Tony

 

[frangiuliano115]

HI TONY

I agree with much that you say - as usual.

“The LOVE of money is the root of all evil.”

I too believe Jesus should be coming back soon. The evengts in the Middle East seem to be pointing in that direction. Although we’re told He’ll come like a thief in the night.

I can’t agree with your very first sentence. And it goes back to what I’ve been posting to you all along. This idea that we each could decide for ourselves what is appropriate or not.
That’s relativism - I can hardly believe you really think that.

I do believe that God decides what is appropriate, not each one of us individually. You’re advocating chaos!

Also, all religions cannot be right. If they’re all right, then they’re all wrong.

God is light, but I think He’d want us to know Him as He wants us to know Him, not as we perceive Him.

Fran

 

[TonyBS]

HI TONY

I agree with much that you say - as usual.

“The LOVE of money is the root of all evil.”

I too believe Jesus should be coming back soon. The evengts in the Middle East seem to be pointing in that direction. Although we’re told He’ll come like a thief in the night.

I can’t agree with your very first sentence. And it goes back to what I’ve been posting to you all along. This idea that we each could decide for ourselves what is appropriate or not.
That’s relativism - I can hardly believe you really think that.

I do believe that God decides what is appropriate, not each one of us individually. You’re advocating chaos!

Also, all religions cannot be right. If they’re all right, then they’re all wrong.

God is light, but I think He’d want us to know Him as He wants us to know Him, not as we perceive Him.

Fran

Dear Fran - I have to tell toy I totally agree with you 99%, but of course there is a different frame of reference there

Consider what I am saying is that we have 100% free will to Choose what is right in Christ’s Message. It is God, Christ and His Word that is Right, we have to submit to this Truth to use our free will as God Intended. The Chaos starts when man decides what is wright and wrong in interpreting the scriptures. (This now leads us into much more )

The one comment “If they’re all right, then they’re all wrong” needs clarification.

It could be if “they are all right then, we, have gotten some ideas wrong”! It could only a few basic concepts as well. Quite amazing!

But remember, they are not all going to be right, I have talked about this further below.

Firstly the Bible is the Guide, Christ tells you how to know what is true, how to know what is False and that the Fruits would prevail, False will not. Also Christ will be Testified about as well.

If this was not to happen during the period from His Ascension until the time of His Return, there would be no need to make sure that He, Christ gave us so many tools as to know True Prophets from False Prophets (Again much more to discuss)

God bless and Regards - I appreciate you replies - Regards Tony

 

[Padres1969]

They don’t sound like OSAS believers. Here’s why:

People who believe that you “accept” Christ, are born again and are not able to lose your salvation because Jesus said, I will not lose even one you (the father) have sent me" or something like that, I can’t look up the scripture, you can maybe. Also, there is a general concept that once you’re saved, you’re under the blood and forgiven everything without even having to ask.

So, you see, you could read all the comics you want to, you could watch any movie you want to without losing your salvation. It’s a bit more complicated but really there’s no need to understand it any better than that.

Also, I’d say that they almost don’t sound christian. Maybe they’re a weird cult. Who are they to decide who’s saved and who isn’t? They could see a person’s heart?

Why bother with them??

There’s a comix festival in a big town about 45 minutes from me. Every year for two weekends. It seems a bit demonic to me - sorry to have to sound like a batty person. Too much ugliness and too many people that seem lost to me. And I don’t mean that they can’t find their way back home!

Fran

Oh I agree that they don’t come off like true OSAS Christians despite their statements to the contrary. I’ve always wanted to engage them however to get to the basis of how they can hold such a seemingly paradoxical position when judging even other OSAS Christians I’ve seen them engage with at Comic-Con (and other events and locations including Disneyland of all places).

That said I think the main thrust of their argument if I did engage them is going to be that anyone who enjoys Disneyland, Comic-Con, Mega churches like Joel Osteen’s, etc… are incapable of being saved if they’re doing so. On the surface their argument seems to be that if you enjoy anything other than worshiping Christ you’re going to hell. A twisted logic IMO, but at least something that isn’t paradoxical. That said it may end up being that it’s simply that they fold everyone at such an event into one box and assume everyone who is there is a “God hating heathen” or the like.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Dear Fran - I have to tell toy I totally agree with you 99%, but of course there is a different frame of reference there

Consider what I am saying is that we have 100% free will to Choose what is right in Christ’s Message. It is God, Christ and His Word that is Right, we have to submit to this Truth to use our free will as God Intended. The Chaos starts when man decides what is wright and wrong in interpreting the scriptures. (This now leads us into much more )

The one comment “If they’re all right, then they’re all wrong” needs clarification.

It could be if “they are all right then, we, have gotten some ideas wrong”! It could only a few basic concepts as well. Quite amazing!

But remember, they are not all going to be right, I have talked about this further below.

Firstly the Bible is the Guide, Christ tells you how to know what is true, how to know what is False and that the Fruits would prevail, False will not. Also Christ will be Testified about as well.

If this was not to happen during the period from His Ascension until the time of His Return, there would be no need to make sure that He, Christ gave us so many tools as to know True Prophets from False Prophets (Again much more to discuss)

God bless and Regards - I appreciate you replies - Regards Tony

You shall know a tree by its fruit.

We’re never going to agree, but it’s nice to exchange ideas.

You know how I feel about putting Jesus into the mix. It can’t be done, but we can’t get into that again.

Good day,
Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

Oh I agree that they don’t come off like true OSAS Christians despite their statements to the contrary. I’ve always wanted to engage them however to get to the basis of how they can hold such a seemingly paradoxical position when judging even other OSAS Christians I’ve seen them engage with at Comic-Con (and other events and locations including Disneyland of all places).

That said I think the main thrust of their argument if I did engage them is going to be that anyone who enjoys Disneyland, Comic-Con, Mega churches like Joel Osteen’s, etc… are incapable of being saved if they’re doing so. On the surface their argument seems to be that if you enjoy anything other than worshiping Christ you’re going to hell. A twisted logic IMO, but at least something that isn’t paradoxical. That said it may end up being that it’s simply that they fold everyone at such an event into one box and assume everyone who is there is a “God hating heathen” or the like.

I’m usually pretty good at coming up with scripture that could be used in different circumstances, but in this case I can’t. I’m in a hurry this morning, but if I think of anything I’ll post again.

You’re right, of course. You know, some go to these comix things and they go to have fun and pass a day and are believers and God loving people. We can’t just stop living. OTOH, some go and are very influenced by demonic inspiration and very far from God.
The costumes have a lot to do with it too. (they dress up like the comic character they like here). So you see, you can’t see man’s heart - which is what I said previously.

Buddha tried giving everything up after he saw the misery in the world. But even he decided it wasn’t a good thing! God gave us the world to enjoy, or why create it at all?
He means for us to live our life fully but to His glory.

You know all this.

The only thought that comes to mind is that these people really enjoy preaching! Is that permissible?? Are they preaching to further the Kingdom, or are they preaching because they enjoy it so much? How could they really tell the difference? To them, is this like going to Disneyland? Just a thought.

Oh. How about this: Jesus said, “By this shall all men know you are my disciples, that you love one another.” John 13:35

“Love God with all your heart and soul and mind, and love your neighbor as yourself.”
Mathew 22:37

How are they showing God’s love by condemning everyone? That doesn’t draw people to God but pushes them away. The reason for preaching is to show God’s love and bring people to understand that they are sinners and in need of God - not to condemn. Even Jesus didn’t condemn. They’re doing more harm than good…

As far as Joel Olsteen is concerned - I do have a bit of a problem with him. He smiles too much!! Joyce Meyers is the same. A bit to psychological for me. All they say is true but they never preach the cross, the need for salvation, the reason Jesus died.

Fran

 

[Servant19]

And, herein lies the difference between christianity and every other religion. We believe Jesus is God. Seems to me He leaves no wiggle room there. Listen to me - either he was God or He was a crazy man. I insist on this. Jesus forgave people’s sins. The Jews believed only God could forgive sin. So Jesus must have thought He was God? Only a crazy person thinks he’s God. Did Krishna or Buddha forgive sins? No. And they never claimed to.

Buddha was a man and never claimed to be God. I don’t need Professor google to know that. Krishna thought he was some kind of divine person, but he never said he was God. Muhammad never claimed to be God.

Jesus claimed to be God. In Exodus 3:14 God refers to Himself to Moses as “I AM”.
In John 8:58 Jesus refers to Himself as I AM. Some pharisees and Jews that were with Him became very angry and started to throw stones at Him. Why? Because He was claiming to be God. He claimed to be the great I AM - or Yahweh. God.

Also see John 10.33. “For good works we do not stone you, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a man, make yourself out to be God.”

Another important passage is Mathew 16:13-17. Peter told Jesus that He was The Christ, the Son of the LIving God, and Jesus confirmed it. And also important, telling Peter that flesh and blood had not revealed this to him, but Jesus’ Father who was in heaven.

This is important because unlike every other religion, christianity cannot be accepted with reason alone. We’re asked to believe something supernatural - it cannot be believed with our intellect alone - as can your religion, for instance. Of course there’s a God, of course perfection exists, of course something had to create all we see. Thus, simple to believe in God.

But our God has a name. He revealed Himself. He went to a cross, he was seen after dying. Kam, if the resurrection isn’t true - I’m ready to pack my bags!

Many see it as a spiritual type of resurrection. This cannot be accepted by a reasonable person, and you seem so reasonable. Thomas, the famous doubter, didn’t believe Jesus could have resurrected. But when he put his finger and hand in Jesus’ side, he declared “My Lord and My God!” There’s no way around this.

Jesus cannot be accepted as a prophet and the resurrection cannot be accepted as spiritual. Christians don’t like the fact that other religions lump Jesus into a hodge podge of belief sysems. We don’t believe in a system - we believe in a person. NOT a person who brings us to God, but God who became a person.

I can’t be comfortable with believing Jesus is not God. And neither would you if you were christian. If Jesus thought he was just a messenger from God, He was a pretty darn arrogant one! He said to go and baptize in the Name of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit - putting Himself on the same plain with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

This also kind of denies your contention that Jesus IS the Holy Spirit. He clearly separates Himself.

i refer back to my original statement:

Tolerance is the virtue
of a man with no conviction.
GK Chesterton

You seem to accept everything - which means you value nothing.

Fran
I’m hoping these written words are coming through properly - I speak with christianly love toward you.

This dialogue cannot continue dear Fran until you do some more research about Krishna.

You will come to realise that there really is no valid reason why you should not be a Hindu based on the logic you are using to glorify Jesus.

God bless you

.

 

[frangiuliano115]

This dialogue cannot continue dear Fran until you do some more research about Krishna.

You will come to realise that there really is no valid reason why you should not be a Hindu based on the logic you are using to glorify Jesus.

God bless you

.

Oh. I thought it WAS over. Sorry 'bout that.

How about if YOU do more research on JESUS??

I’ll become Hindu when Krishna rises from the dead.

Don’t mean that in a mean way - it’s the truth for me!

Fran

 

[Servant19]

Oh. I thought it WAS over. Sorry 'bout that.

How about if YOU do more research on JESUS??

I’ll become Hindu when Krishna rises from the dead.

Don’t mean that in a mean way - it’s the truth for me!

Fran

So no more questions?


I think we can end with asking you to look more into Ignatian spirituality

.

 

[frangiuliano115]

So no more questions?


I think we can end with asking you to look more into Ignatian spirituality

.

I guess you mean St. Ignatius. How about Francis di Sales or Teresa of Avila. They’re pretty good too.

But, you see Kam, I don’t base my faith on any MAN. This is what I can’t get across to you. This was the reason I took the time to write that long post just above. I base my belief on Jesus. If He’s not real (and I don’t mean a prophet) then my faith is baseless and I’d even have to wonder if God even exists.

Christianity is different. Jesus is different. All Godly prophets such as Krishna were moved by the spirit of God. They were god in a certain kind of way - by allowing us to see the light of God, as even you understand it. But they weren’t GOD. Incarnate. Come in the flesh.

All people who have the spirit of God understand each other. That’s how I could understand you. I know nothing about the baha’i faith except that you believe in this all encompassing power of God and His desire to let Himself be known through different prophets who come to express the light of God and let it be known to man. This is very true and very beautiful. But, I insist, Jesus is different.

I really meant it about you’re looking into it a bit more. If you cannot believe the resurrection really happened, and not just spiritually, then you have to reject EVERYTHING about Him, what the writers of the N.T. said, His life - the concepts become meaningless, etc.

It’s tough to accept. It’s easier to think He was just another Godly prophet.

Fran

 

[Servant19]

I guess you mean St. Ignatius. How about Francis di Sales or Teresa of Avila. They’re pretty good too.

But, you see Kam, I don’t base my faith on any MAN. This is what I can’t get across to you. This was the reason I took the time to write that long post just above. I base my belief on Jesus. If He’s not real (and I don’t mean a prophet) then my faith is baseless and I’d even have to wonder if God even exists.

Christianity is different. Jesus is different. All Godly prophets such as Krishna were moved by the spirit of God. They were god in a certain kind of way - by allowing us to see the light of God, as even you understand it. But they weren’t GOD. Incarnate. Come in the flesh.

All people who have the spirit of God understand each other. That’s how I could understand you. I know nothing about the baha’i faith except that you believe in this all encompassing power of God and His desire to let Himself be known through different prophets who come to express the light of God and let it be known to man. This is very true and very beautiful. But, I insist, Jesus is different.

I really meant it about you’re looking into it a bit more. If you cannot believe the resurrection really happened, and not just spiritually, then you have to reject EVERYTHING about Him, what the writers of the N.T. said, His life - the concepts become meaningless, etc.

It’s tough to accept. It’s easier to think He was just another Godly prophet.

Fran

By what basis do you say that Krishna was a man and Jesus was not?

.

 

[frangiuliano115]

By what basis do you say that Krishna was a man and Jesus was not?

.

How did you answer so fast???

I explained it in my post.

I can’t spend anymore time here right now - must go out.

It has to do with the entire birth story in Luke 2.
It has to do with his forgiving sin. How does a man forgive sin?
it has to do with the RESURRECTION. Was it true or not??

Why can’t you understand thisj??? Did Krishna die and come back from the dead?

Am I going to have to take the time to google Krishna and find out a lot of things about him so I can speak to you?

NO. Because Krishna and all the other prophets never resurrected!

I don’t know what more there is to be said about this. What exactly do you know that Krisha said that makes you think he thought he was God? I told you about Jesus, you tell me about Krishna.

Of course all these prophets were very the same. You and I are very alike. But Krishn and Jesus never spoke to each other - so it’s not like they had a conspiracy going. So were they exactly the same? No. For the reasons I’ve already given.

Will not be back till later on.

Fran

 

[Servant19]

How did you answer so fast???

I explained it in my post.

I can’t spend anymore time here right now - must go out.

It has to do with the entire birth story in Luke 2.
It has to do with his forgiving sin. How does a man forgive sin?
it has to do with the RESURRECTION. Was it true or not??

Why can’t you understand thisj??? Did Krishna die and come back from the dead?

Am I going to have to take the time to google Krishna and find out a lot of things about him so I can speak to you?

NO. Because Krishna and all the other prophets never resurrected!

I don’t know what more there is to be said about this. What exactly do you know that Krisha said that makes you think he thought he was God? I told you about Jesus, you tell me about Krishna.

Of course all these prophets were very the same. You and I are very alike. But Krishn and Jesus never spoke to each other - so it’s not like they had a conspiracy going. So were they exactly the same? No. For the reasons I’ve already given.

Will not be back till later on.

Fran

I find it bizarre that you state in a previous post that " I don’t base my faith on any MAN"…yet your entire Faith is based on accounts relayed to you by MEN in the form of Gospels…


.

 

[Seekerjn316]

And, herein lies the difference between christianity and every other religion. We believe Jesus is God. Seems to me He leaves no wiggle room there. Listen to me - either he was God or He was a crazy man. I insist on this. Jesus forgave people’s sins. The Jews believed only God could forgive sin. So Jesus must have thought He was God? Only a crazy person thinks he’s God. Did Krishna or Buddha forgive sins? No. And they never claimed to.

Buddha was a man and never claimed to be God. I don’t need Professor google to know that. Krishna thought he was some kind of divine person, but he never said he was God. Muhammad never claimed to be God. I

Jesus claimed to be God. In Exodus 3:14 God refers to Himself to Moses as “I AM”.
In John 8:58 Jesus refers to Himself as I AM. Some pharisees and Jews that were with Him became very angry and started to throw stones at Him. Why? Because He was claiming to be God. He claimed to be the great I AM - or Yahweh. God.

Also see John 10.33. “For good works we do not stone you, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a man, make yourself out to be God.”

Another important passage is
frangiuliano115;13398181:

Hi Seekerjn,

It’s difficult for me to understand how you could read my post no. 54 and then ask the above.

First of all, christianity hinges on Christ and not on the apostles - although they referred the story of salvation.

Second of all the truth of Christ hinges on the resurrection. You could just reread my post no. 54.

There’s no use getting into who wrote what gospel, or letter for that matter. Just quick: it’s pretty much accepted that Mathew, or Levi, wrote the gospel of Mathew. Mark was a friend of Peter and he must have written what Peter taught and told him about Jesus. Luke travelled with Paul and you said Paul seems authentic to you. John’s gospel is accepted by all biblical scholars and theologians as being written by John. John lived with Jesus for at least 3 years, possibly a bit more.

Oh. And I’d say they were written as early as 20 years after Jesus died and John much later, after the 70’s if I remember.

So this is how I think of it.

Ghandi died about 60 years ago. About 40 years after his death, some of his friends thought they’d write a book about him. A couple of them died before they could even start it but passed the information on. A couple of them actually did get to write a book.

In the book they say Ghandi was a great prophet. He healed people from blindness and performed many other miracles. They said they saw him “shine” and levitate and speak to a couple of dead people. They say he brought a few persons back to life. They say he forgave people’s sins. They say that he claimed to be God. Not a god. They write about how he CAME BACK TO LIFE and how they saw him and touched him and ate with him. They take the book and travel the known world to disperse the information. They don’t get rich from the book. They’re imprisoned, tortured and killed. They never change their story.

There are people still alive that knew or remembered Ghandi.

Let’s see. We know Ghandi didn’t do these things. Would you say the people who wrote the book expecting us to believe it were sane people??

I can’t add anything to this.

Fran

I went back and read #54…it had no information concerning NT authorship.

 

[eazyduzit]

And, herein lies the difference between christianity and every other religion. We believe Jesus is God. Seems to me He leaves no wiggle room there. Listen to me - either he was God or He was a crazy man. I insist on this. Jesus forgave people’s sins. The Jews believed only God could forgive sin. So Jesus must have thought He was God? Only a crazy person thinks he’s God. Did Krishna or Buddha forgive sins? No. And they never claimed to.

Buddha was a man and never claimed to be God. I don’t need Professor google to know that. Krishna thought he was some kind of divine person, but he never said he was God. Muhammad never claimed to be God.

Jesus claimed to be God. In Exodus 3:14 God refers to Himself to Moses as “I AM”.
In John 8:58 Jesus refers to Himself as I AM. Some pharisees and Jews that were with Him became very angry and started to throw stones at Him. Why? Because He was claiming to be God. He claimed to be the great I AM - or Yahweh. God.
’
Also see John 10.33. “For good works we do not stone you, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a man, make yourself out to be God.”

Another important passage is Mathew 16:13-17. Peter told Jesus that He was The Christ, the Son of the LIving God, and Jesus confirmed it. And also important, telling Peter that flesh and blood had not revealed this to him, but Jesus’ Father who was in heaven.

This is important because unlike every other religion, christianity cannot be accepted with reason alone. We’re asked to believe something supernatural - it cannot be believed with our intellect alone - as can your religion, for instance. Of course there’s a God, of course perfection exists, of course something had to create all we see. Thus, simple to believe in God.

But our God has a name. He revealed Himself. He went to a cross, he was seen after dying. Kam, if the resurrection isn’t true - I’m ready to pack my bags!

Many see it as a spiritual type of resurrection. This cannot be accepted by a reasonable person, and you seem so reasonable. Thomas, the famous doubter, didn’t believe Jesus could have resurrected. But when he put his finger and hand in Jesus’ side, he declared “My Lord and My God!” There’s no way around this.

Jesus cannot be accepted as a prophet and the resurrection cannot be accepted as spiritual. Christians don’t like the fact that other religions lump Jesus into a hodge podge of belief sysems. We don’t believe in a system - we believe in a person. NOT a person who brings us to God, but God who became a person.

I can’t be comfortable with believing Jesus is not God. And neither would you if you were christian. If Jesus thought he was just a messenger from God, He was a pretty darn arrogant one! He said to go and baptize in the Name of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit - putting Himself on the same plain with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

This also kind of denies your contention that Jesus IS the Holy Spirit. He clearly separates Himself.

i refer back to my original statement:

Tolerance is the virtue
of a man with no conviction.
GK Chesterton

You seem to accept everything - which means you value nothing.

Fran
I’m hoping these written words are coming through properly - I speak with christianly love toward you.

I brought back Fran’s post because it makes a good point. Jesus is unique. Others did claim to be a manifestation of God, such as Elijah Muhammad, but Jesus proved if through His perfect life, the miracles, and the resurrection.

In addition, Christianity is different in principle than every other religion. As C.S. Lewis said, Religion is Man seeking God, while Christianity is God seeking man.

In religion, we are responsible to please the Creator. With Christianity, God pleases Himself, or that is, through Christ He has made complete satisfaction. Thus, we can enjoy a personal relationship with Him, not based on our performance, but on His Grace. In this way God has restored the relationship He had with man in the Garden, and made it even better. This is why Jesus is called the “second Adam”. A person enters into this new covenant of Grace when he decides to trust Christ, through the Gospel message.

Is this making sense?

 

[eazyduzit]

I find it bizarre that you state in a previous post that " I don’t base my faith on any MAN"…yet your entire Faith is based on accounts relayed to you by MEN in the form of Gospels…


.

I agree with Fran. The blble claims that it’s authors wrote as they were moved by the Spirit. It was not that God inspired their minds, but He gave them inspired or God breathed words.
In addition, if you read Acts, it frequently says that God Himself confirmed His word with signs and wonders following. Even the miracle of the tongues in ch. 2 was a confirmation in that everyone heard in his own language.

This is a solid foundation for me.