Yeah and record the DNA.So I heard some news that turned out to be over twenty years old, that Jesus has sons, wife, etc. And James Cameron is going to film them.
His followers think he was human. Not divine, just a chosen messenger, like they think of Moses, Jesus, many of the same great men of religious history.maybe they were refering to Mohammed.
Yeah but this is kind of a sacred deal here. Jesus fell into the 3 in one as his life on earth as a man he certainly became very aware of our short comings! But interesting comment.His followers think he was human. Not divine, just a chosen messenger, like they think of Moses, Jesus, many of the same great men of religious history.
In fact it's weird we don't hear as much about how Muslims revere Jesus.
I think Christians need not be worried about this one way or the other, I mean Jesus' greatness was in what he did and said, not who his Dad was...
Do you know where he said he was the son of God? Chapter/verse/etc? I had a religious friend tell me Jesus never actually claimed he was divine, but if you have some info, please share.He proclaimed to be the Son of God on the earth. But procreating is one thing but being married was the correct way to handle things.
I agree - espeially since the 'news' was from the 1980s...I think James Cameron noticed how much money Dan Brown made off his fictional work and thought he might as well get some of that money coming his way. There's a large ignorant mass of people out there, just waiting to grab onto the latest "research" as put forth by Hollywood.
Who are you speaking of when you say "His followers think he was human."? I think this might be your personal opinion and not backed up by Holy Scripture.Gurdari said:His followers think he was human. Not divine, just a chosen messenger, like they think of Moses, Jesus, many of the same great men of religious history.
What is this, Clintonian questioning of what the definition of is is? The Bible is full of testimonies that Jesus is the Son of God, not only from those who were closest to him but also the demons declare such. How did so many-- even the demons--get this testimony if it was not true? Even God Himself declares that Jesus is his son (Matt. 3:17; 2 Peter 1:17-18) Would you question His testimony on the subject?I don't think Jesus ever actually said he was the son of God, or God.
Muhammed. That's who I was talking about. It's backed up by every Muslim I've spoken too.Who are you speaking of when you say "His followers think he was human."? I think this might be your personal opinion and not backed up by Holy Scripture.
No Clintonian whatever. I just asked if JESUS HIMSELF ever said that, as I had heard that he did not actually say it. I guess you are agreeing that Jesus did not say that? I mean other than the common 'lord is our father' talk that every believer says...What is this, Clintonian questioning of what the definition of is is? The Bible is full of testimonies that Jesus is the Son of God, not only from those who were closest to him but also the demons declare such. How did so many-- even the demons--get this testimony if it was not true? Even God Himself declares that Jesus is his son (Matt. 3:17; 2 Peter 1:17-18) Would you question His testimony on the subject?
How can anyone know? Try reading the Bible, the source of God's messages to mankind through his personally selected prophets. Bet that's an idea you have never entertained.I am usually skeptical of people who claim to quote God.... unless he gave them permission to put words in his mouth, how can anyone know?
How can anyone know? They can't. They can only think, or think they know.How can anyone know? Try reading the Bible, the source of God's messages to mankind through his personally selected prophets. Bet that's an idea you have never entertained.
Don't think so. It's obvious your knowledge of the Bible is minimal--probably nonexistent would be a better descriptive.I think you just lost a bet.
Either back that up, or explain in anyway you can why it's ... "obvious my knowledge of the Bible is minimal or nonexistent".Don't think so. It's obvious your knowledge of the Bible is minimal--probably nonexistent would be a better descriptive.