Historical Jesus: The unchanging reality of the New Testament record.

[Foxfyre]

A middle eastern Jew named Jesus existed, as did a man known as the prophet Muhammad. The problem is, their is no evidence for the miraculous acts.

That's a problem for you?

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Ok, let alone that this is completely different, that the gospels were written decades after, and all of the other shit, tell me, are the acts of the quran true?

While I know some delightful and great people who happen to be Muslim, I have seen zero evidence that people's lives are made better or that people are made better by following the Qu'ran. I have seen massive evidence that people's lives are made better and that people are made better by allowing the Christ into their lives. So believing the Gospel is a whole lot easier for me than believing the Qu'ran.

The Gospels were edited together decades after the actual events, but almost certainly contained material that had been written down in notes or reported in the oral tradition long before. Even a cursory reading of the Gospels makes it clear that they were not written as one cohesive document but were rather compiled from a number of different sources.

 

[Marxist]

A middle eastern Jew named Jesus existed, as did a man known as the prophet Muhammad. The problem is, their is no evidence for the miraculous acts.

That's a problem for you?

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Ok, let alone that this is completely different, that the gospels were written decades after, and all of the other shit, tell me, are the acts of the quran true?

I have seen zero evidence that people's lives are made better or that people are made better by following the Qu'ran. I have seen massive evidence that people's lives are made better and that people are made better by allowing the Christ into their lives. So believing the Gospel is a whole lot easier for me than believing the Qu'ran.

The Gospels were edited together decades after the actual events, but almost certainly contained material that had been written down in notes or reported in the oral tradition long before.

Really? Tell that to the muslims worldwide. Christianity isn't some perfect, infallible religion. You've admitted you're cherry picking what you want to believe, thanks for that.

 

[koshergrl]

A middle eastern Jew named Jesus existed, as did a man known as the prophet Muhammad. The problem is, their is no evidence for the miraculous acts.

That's a problem for you?

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Well they're different to the death cultists...because if they admit that they happened, they have to accept that they're doomed if they don't accept the gift of salvation...and that there will be a judgement for their actions on earth. People who reject Christ are happy in their belief they'll never be accountable for the truly horrendous sins they commit, because they believe the lie that if society accepts those sins, then they're not really sins..and there will be no reckoning.

I know you believe that, and I also believe that salvation is given through the Christ, though I am not at all convinced there is only one 'right' way to receive that. Believing that a man performed miracles does not automatically extrapolate into believing all the other doctrines put forth by those of the Christian faith.

I never said that it did. I don't know what you mean when you say there are various ways to receive salvation through Christ...I mean, there's only one way that I'm aware of, and that's to accept, believe, confess.

 

[koshergrl]

A middle eastern Jew named Jesus existed, as did a man known as the prophet Muhammad. The problem is, their is no evidence for the miraculous acts.

That's a problem for you?

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Well they're different to the death cultists...because if they admit that they happened, they have to accept that they're doomed if they don't accept the gift of salvation...and that there will be a judgement for their actions on earth. People who reject Christ are happy in their belief they'll never be accountable for the truly horrendous sins they commit, because they believe the lie that if society accepts those sins, then they're not really sins..and there will be no reckoning.

What about Hinduism?

What about it?

I like macaroni.

 

[Marxist]

That's a problem for you?

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Well they're different to the death cultists...because if they admit that they happened, they have to accept that they're doomed if they don't accept the gift of salvation...and that there will be a judgement for their actions on earth. People who reject Christ are happy in their belief they'll never be accountable for the truly horrendous sins they commit, because they believe the lie that if society accepts those sins, then they're not really sins..and there will be no reckoning.

What about Hinduism?

What about it?

I like macaroni.

Are hindus doomed to hell?

 

[koshergrl]

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Well they're different to the death cultists...because if they admit that they happened, they have to accept that they're doomed if they don't accept the gift of salvation...and that there will be a judgement for their actions on earth. People who reject Christ are happy in their belief they'll never be accountable for the truly horrendous sins they commit, because they believe the lie that if society accepts those sins, then they're not really sins..and there will be no reckoning.

What about Hinduism?

What about it?

I like macaroni.

Are hindus doomed to hell?

Ask God.

 

[Marxist]

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Well they're different to the death cultists...because if they admit that they happened, they have to accept that they're doomed if they don't accept the gift of salvation...and that there will be a judgement for their actions on earth. People who reject Christ are happy in their belief they'll never be accountable for the truly horrendous sins they commit, because they believe the lie that if society accepts those sins, then they're not really sins..and there will be no reckoning.

What about Hinduism?

What about it?

I like macaroni.

Are hindus doomed to hell?

Ask God.

The bible certainly says they are. That's as close as it gets. Ask which god?

 

[Foxfyre]

That's a problem for you?

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Well they're different to the death cultists...because if they admit that they happened, they have to accept that they're doomed if they don't accept the gift of salvation...and that there will be a judgement for their actions on earth. People who reject Christ are happy in their belief they'll never be accountable for the truly horrendous sins they commit, because they believe the lie that if society accepts those sins, then they're not really sins..and there will be no reckoning.

I know you believe that, and I also believe that salvation is given through the Christ, though I am not at all convinced there is only one 'right' way to receive that. Believing that a man performed miracles does not automatically extrapolate into believing all the other doctrines put forth by those of the Christian faith.

I never said that it did. I don't know what you mean when you say there are various ways to receive salvation through Christ...I mean, there's only one way that I'm aware of, and that's to accept, believe, confess.

But I believe there is more than one way to accept, believe, confess. And I leave that up to God to decide how it will be done as I do not see that as our prerogative to do. We are given no power to 'save' anybody. Our job is to arrange the meeting, but we should always let God take it from there.

 

[Marxist]

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Well they're different to the death cultists...because if they admit that they happened, they have to accept that they're doomed if they don't accept the gift of salvation...and that there will be a judgement for their actions on earth. People who reject Christ are happy in their belief they'll never be accountable for the truly horrendous sins they commit, because they believe the lie that if society accepts those sins, then they're not really sins..and there will be no reckoning.

I know you believe that, and I also believe that salvation is given through the Christ, though I am not at all convinced there is only one 'right' way to receive that. Believing that a man performed miracles does not automatically extrapolate into believing all the other doctrines put forth by those of the Christian faith.

I never said that it did. I don't know what you mean when you say there are various ways to receive salvation through Christ...I mean, there's only one way that I'm aware of, and that's to accept, believe, confess.

But I believe there is more than one way to accept, believe, confess. And I leave that up to God to decide how it will be done as I do not see that as our prerogative to do. We are given no power to 'save' anybody. Our job is to arrange the meeting, but we should always let God take it from there.

I just wish christians would do what jesus actually said and followed his teachings, not vehemently hate the poor like most christians on this website.

 

[Foxfyre]

That's a problem for you?

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Ok, let alone that this is completely different, that the gospels were written decades after, and all of the other shit, tell me, are the acts of the quran true?

I have seen zero evidence that people's lives are made better or that people are made better by following the Qu'ran. I have seen massive evidence that people's lives are made better and that people are made better by allowing the Christ into their lives. So believing the Gospel is a whole lot easier for me than believing the Qu'ran.

The Gospels were edited together decades after the actual events, but almost certainly contained material that had been written down in notes or reported in the oral tradition long before.

Really? Tell that to the muslims worldwide. Christianity isn't some perfect, infallible religion. You've admitted you're cherry picking what you want to believe, thanks for that.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible. Our interpretation, human-devised doctrines, understandings, and practices are definitely imperfect and quite fallible however. Which is why, if we believe the Bible, all of us Christians know we are sinners and imperfect beings.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Well they're different to the death cultists...because if they admit that they happened, they have to accept that they're doomed if they don't accept the gift of salvation...and that there will be a judgement for their actions on earth. People who reject Christ are happy in their belief they'll never be accountable for the truly horrendous sins they commit, because they believe the lie that if society accepts those sins, then they're not really sins..and there will be no reckoning.

I know you believe that, and I also believe that salvation is given through the Christ, though I am not at all convinced there is only one 'right' way to receive that. Believing that a man performed miracles does not automatically extrapolate into believing all the other doctrines put forth by those of the Christian faith.

I never said that it did. I don't know what you mean when you say there are various ways to receive salvation through Christ...I mean, there's only one way that I'm aware of, and that's to accept, believe, confess.

But I believe there is more than one way to accept, believe, confess. And I leave that up to God to decide how it will be done as I do not see that as our prerogative to do. We are given no power to 'save' anybody. Our job is to arrange the meeting, but we should always let God take it from there.

I just wish christians would do what jesus actually said and followed his teachings, not vehemently hate the poor like most christians on this website.

And I wish those who hate Christians would at least have the charity to not mischaracterize and accuse them as you just did. But then the Scriptures tell us to expect that, so oh well.

 

[Marxist]

No. I'm simply stating facts.

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Ok, let alone that this is completely different, that the gospels were written decades after, and all of the other shit, tell me, are the acts of the quran true?

I have seen zero evidence that people's lives are made better or that people are made better by following the Qu'ran. I have seen massive evidence that people's lives are made better and that people are made better by allowing the Christ into their lives. So believing the Gospel is a whole lot easier for me than believing the Qu'ran.

The Gospels were edited together decades after the actual events, but almost certainly contained material that had been written down in notes or reported in the oral tradition long before.

Really? Tell that to the muslims worldwide. Christianity isn't some perfect, infallible religion. You've admitted you're cherry picking what you want to believe, thanks for that.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible. Our interpretation, human-devised doctrines, understandings, and practices are definitely imperfect and quite fallible however. Which is why, if we believe the Bible, all of us Christians know we are sinners and imperfect beings.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible.

Please tell me you're joking.

 

[Marxist]

Well they're different to the death cultists...because if they admit that they happened, they have to accept that they're doomed if they don't accept the gift of salvation...and that there will be a judgement for their actions on earth. People who reject Christ are happy in their belief they'll never be accountable for the truly horrendous sins they commit, because they believe the lie that if society accepts those sins, then they're not really sins..and there will be no reckoning.

I know you believe that, and I also believe that salvation is given through the Christ, though I am not at all convinced there is only one 'right' way to receive that. Believing that a man performed miracles does not automatically extrapolate into believing all the other doctrines put forth by those of the Christian faith.

I never said that it did. I don't know what you mean when you say there are various ways to receive salvation through Christ...I mean, there's only one way that I'm aware of, and that's to accept, believe, confess.

But I believe there is more than one way to accept, believe, confess. And I leave that up to God to decide how it will be done as I do not see that as our prerogative to do. We are given no power to 'save' anybody. Our job is to arrange the meeting, but we should always let God take it from there.

I just wish christians would do what jesus actually said and followed his teachings, not vehemently hate the poor like most christians on this website.

And I wish those who hate Christians would at least have the charity to not mischaracterize and accuse them as you just did. But then the Scriptures tell us to expect that, so oh well.

No, I will accuse christians who say that the poor don't deserve food and just need to use their boot straps, all while saying Jesus was perfectly ok with greed.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is no evidence that Washington crossed the Delaware, or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, or that Davy Crockett died at the Alamo. All we believe to be fact because of the historical record that exists, and we take it on faith that the historical record that exists is the way it was.

Those miracles in the Bible are no different.

Ok, let alone that this is completely different, that the gospels were written decades after, and all of the other shit, tell me, are the acts of the quran true?

I have seen zero evidence that people's lives are made better or that people are made better by following the Qu'ran. I have seen massive evidence that people's lives are made better and that people are made better by allowing the Christ into their lives. So believing the Gospel is a whole lot easier for me than believing the Qu'ran.

The Gospels were edited together decades after the actual events, but almost certainly contained material that had been written down in notes or reported in the oral tradition long before.

Really? Tell that to the muslims worldwide. Christianity isn't some perfect, infallible religion. You've admitted you're cherry picking what you want to believe, thanks for that.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible. Our interpretation, human-devised doctrines, understandings, and practices are definitely imperfect and quite fallible however. Which is why, if we believe the Bible, all of us Christians know we are sinners and imperfect beings.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible.

Please tell me you're joking.

Nope. I am 100% convinced I am most likely right about that. But tell me, why did you leave out the qualifiers I also included along with that statement. Was there some reason that you did that?

 

[Marxist]

Ok, let alone that this is completely different, that the gospels were written decades after, and all of the other shit, tell me, are the acts of the quran true?

I have seen zero evidence that people's lives are made better or that people are made better by following the Qu'ran. I have seen massive evidence that people's lives are made better and that people are made better by allowing the Christ into their lives. So believing the Gospel is a whole lot easier for me than believing the Qu'ran.

The Gospels were edited together decades after the actual events, but almost certainly contained material that had been written down in notes or reported in the oral tradition long before.

Really? Tell that to the muslims worldwide. Christianity isn't some perfect, infallible religion. You've admitted you're cherry picking what you want to believe, thanks for that.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible. Our interpretation, human-devised doctrines, understandings, and practices are definitely imperfect and quite fallible however. Which is why, if we believe the Bible, all of us Christians know we are sinners and imperfect beings.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible.

Please tell me you're joking.

Nope. I am 100% convinced I am most likely right about that. But tell me, why did you leave out the qualifiers I also included along with that statement. Was there some reason that you did that?

I put in the not religion part, and that is ignorant to assume something is perfect and flawless.

 

[Foxfyre]

I know you believe that, and I also believe that salvation is given through the Christ, though I am not at all convinced there is only one 'right' way to receive that. Believing that a man performed miracles does not automatically extrapolate into believing all the other doctrines put forth by those of the Christian faith.

I never said that it did. I don't know what you mean when you say there are various ways to receive salvation through Christ...I mean, there's only one way that I'm aware of, and that's to accept, believe, confess.

But I believe there is more than one way to accept, believe, confess. And I leave that up to God to decide how it will be done as I do not see that as our prerogative to do. We are given no power to 'save' anybody. Our job is to arrange the meeting, but we should always let God take it from there.

I just wish christians would do what jesus actually said and followed his teachings, not vehemently hate the poor like most christians on this website.

And I wish those who hate Christians would at least have the charity to not mischaracterize and accuse them as you just did. But then the Scriptures tell us to expect that, so oh well.

No, I will accuse christians who say that the poor don't deserve food and just need to use their boot straps, all while saying Jesus was perfectly ok with greed.

I don't know any Christians who hate the poor. I have witnessed and know of Christians who put a whole lot more of their time, energy, resources, and lives into efforts to help the poor than does ANY other group anywhere. And I have never heard any Christian say that Jesus was okay with greed, perfectly or otherwise.

 

[Foxfyre]

I have seen zero evidence that people's lives are made better or that people are made better by following the Qu'ran. I have seen massive evidence that people's lives are made better and that people are made better by allowing the Christ into their lives. So believing the Gospel is a whole lot easier for me than believing the Qu'ran.

The Gospels were edited together decades after the actual events, but almost certainly contained material that had been written down in notes or reported in the oral tradition long before.

Really? Tell that to the muslims worldwide. Christianity isn't some perfect, infallible religion. You've admitted you're cherry picking what you want to believe, thanks for that.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible. Our interpretation, human-devised doctrines, understandings, and practices are definitely imperfect and quite fallible however. Which is why, if we believe the Bible, all of us Christians know we are sinners and imperfect beings.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible.

Please tell me you're joking.

Nope. I am 100% convinced I am most likely right about that. But tell me, why did you leave out the qualifiers I also included along with that statement. Was there some reason that you did that?

I put in the not religion part, and that is ignorant to assume something is perfect and flawless.

But that is because you don't know Jesus. When you do, then you will know what perfect and flawless is.

 

[Marxist]

I never said that it did. I don't know what you mean when you say there are various ways to receive salvation through Christ...I mean, there's only one way that I'm aware of, and that's to accept, believe, confess.

But I believe there is more than one way to accept, believe, confess. And I leave that up to God to decide how it will be done as I do not see that as our prerogative to do. We are given no power to 'save' anybody. Our job is to arrange the meeting, but we should always let God take it from there.

I just wish christians would do what jesus actually said and followed his teachings, not vehemently hate the poor like most christians on this website.

And I wish those who hate Christians would at least have the charity to not mischaracterize and accuse them as you just did. But then the Scriptures tell us to expect that, so oh well.

No, I will accuse christians who say that the poor don't deserve food and just need to use their boot straps, all while saying Jesus was perfectly ok with greed.

I don't know any Christians who hate the poor. I have witnessed and know of Christians who put a whole lot more of their time, energy, resources, and lives into efforts to help the poor than does ANY other group anywhere. And I have never heard any Christian say that Jesus was okay with greed, perfectly or otherwise.

Christians who say jesus didn't want the rich to give away their useless wealth...

 

[Marxist]

Really? Tell that to the muslims worldwide. Christianity isn't some perfect, infallible religion. You've admitted you're cherry picking what you want to believe, thanks for that.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible. Our interpretation, human-devised doctrines, understandings, and practices are definitely imperfect and quite fallible however. Which is why, if we believe the Bible, all of us Christians know we are sinners and imperfect beings.

I think Christianity probably is a perfect and infallible state, not religion, because it is grounded in the perfect and infallible.

Please tell me you're joking.

Nope. I am 100% convinced I am most likely right about that. But tell me, why did you leave out the qualifiers I also included along with that statement. Was there some reason that you did that?

I put in the not religion part, and that is ignorant to assume something is perfect and flawless.

But that is because you don't know Jesus. When you do, then you will know what perfect and flawless is.

You don't know him either, unless you have met him.

 

[Foxfyre]

But I believe there is more than one way to accept, believe, confess. And I leave that up to God to decide how it will be done as I do not see that as our prerogative to do. We are given no power to 'save' anybody. Our job is to arrange the meeting, but we should always let God take it from there.

I just wish christians would do what jesus actually said and followed his teachings, not vehemently hate the poor like most christians on this website.

And I wish those who hate Christians would at least have the charity to not mischaracterize and accuse them as you just did. But then the Scriptures tell us to expect that, so oh well.

No, I will accuse christians who say that the poor don't deserve food and just need to use their boot straps, all while saying Jesus was perfectly ok with greed.

I don't know any Christians who hate the poor. I have witnessed and know of Christians who put a whole lot more of their time, energy, resources, and lives into efforts to help the poor than does ANY other group anywhere. And I have never heard any Christian say that Jesus was okay with greed, perfectly or otherwise.

Christians who say jesus didn't want the rich to give away their useless wealth...

Really? Please name those Christians. I know a LOT of Christians over the years, and I'm pretty sure I've never heard or read a Christian who said that.