A question about Christianity...

[GreatBarracuda]

Originally posted by: whattaguy
Jesus, on a number occasions, said "Your sins are forgiven" to various people who needed healing. The Pharisees were correct in saying that God was the only one who could forgive sins. They called Jesus a blasphemer because of the power he claimed to have. He equated himself with God because of his claim to be able to forgive sins. Christians would be in big trouble if Jesus Christ were not God. If Jesus were not God, the satisfaction for the payment of sins would be incomplete.

Is it not possible that Jesus had knowledge from God that these people were forgiven and he simply conveyed the message?

Originally posted by: Stark
If Jesus' great commission was to spread the gospel to the whole earth, it seems likely to me that using the greatest power the world had known (and it's unprecedented series of roads) would be a logical means of fulfilling that goal. Why else would the messiah have shown up when he did? There was a slight historical window between when the Jews had returned from captivity (Ezra and Nehemiah) and the destruction of Jerusalem (Josephus' Jewish War). If Jesus wasn't the messiah (and if he was from the line of David he clearly would have known he could have been the messiah his entire life), then mankind is still living under The Abrahamic Covenant? Mohammed was right and we should all worship Allah?

Jesus, as a descenant of David, was mankind's only shot for the Messiah of the Hebrew God. If he wasn't, the Bible is a load of dookie and there is no such thing as god. Hinduism, Buddhism, Scientology and atheism are the only logical options left.

There is no doubt that Jesus was the messiah, the anointed one the Jews had been waiting for, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he has to be the son of God or that salvation is through him alone. The jews were simply waiting for someone who would unite them by reaffirming and enforcing the law (Torah) and bring them back their former glory and stature.

Let's not forget that in the Bible itself are clear and definite statements that confirm the oneness of God (i.e. refute the trinity) and show Jesus for what he really was, in my opinion, a humble servant of God.

Here is something that Peter said:

- ?We must obey God rather than men! The God of our fathers raised Jesus...? (Acts 5:29-30).

Again, not to belittle Jesus or disrespect him in anyway, but here's another instance in the Bible that shows that Jesus is not God and that whatever he does, it's because of the power given to him by God, whom he himself worships:

- ?He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them.? (Mark 6:5).

If he were God, he shouldn't have had any problems doing what he wanted to do.

In the old testament, God almighty says: ?Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.? (Isaiah 43:10).

How then can anyone attribute a claim of divinity to Jesus when he himself conveyed the above verse to the people! How then can Jesus be the saviour the Jews had been waiting for, if he goes on to make claims that would shame Moses!

When someone asked Jesus:

- "?Of all the commandments, which is the most important?? ?The most important one,? answered Jesus, ?is this: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.?? (Mark 12:28-30).

This is a clear example of Jesus' purpose in this world: the confirmer of what came before him, that is the Torah.

Then the man who asked the question earlier confirms the fact of God's monotheism:

- ??Well said, teacher,? the man replied. ?You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him.?? (Mark 12:32).

If Jesus were God, he would have pointed it out to him at that point, but he didn't.

Here is something that confirms that Jesus is a mere mortal, created by the One who creates everything, God:

- "I live because of the Father...? (John 6:57).
- ?By myself I can do nothing...? (John 5:30).

In one instance, a woman was healed by coming up behind him and touching his cloak. Jesus, however did not know who it was that touched him:

- ?At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, ?Who touched my clothes??? (Mark 5:30).

- ?Jesus kept looking around to see who had done it.? (Mark 5:32).

In one instance, Jesus is quoted as saying the following:

- ?...you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God.? (John 8:40)

Again, making the distinction between himself and God, crystal clear.

Going back to the point made by whattaguy of Jesus being able to forgive sins and therefore being God, if the text is read fully and in context, it reveals the truth of Jesus being a servant of God and nothing more at that:

- ?Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.? (Matthew 9:2)

Reading ahead, the gospel writer documents the actions of the people present at the moment, they ?...praised God, who had given such authority to men.? Clearly this shows that Jesus is not the only man to receive such authority from God.

I think if anyone looks at all the verses from the Bible which I have quoted in this post and earlier, it makes a compelling case of the Bible confirming Jesus' status as a humble servant of God, completely and utterly distinct and separate from God and not associated in His divinity in any way. It also refutes the trinity or at the very least presents powerful evidence to the contrary.

This is not to say that there aren't verses in the Bible that show Jesus as being divine. These, in my opinion, are distortions of the monotheistic teachings of Jesus later in the development of Christianity. Again, one can hardly deny the change in the image of Jesus, starting from the first gospel and going to the last; Jesus is increasingly portrayed as divine, a concept that is certainly a later development.

Also, why should Jesus not retain the same teachings as that professed by all the prophets of God before him? The claim to divinity attributed to him totally separates him from the Abrahamic faith of monotheism and shows him to be nothing but a blasphemer. Hence the reason I don't believe he ever made this claim.

 

[GreatBarracuda]

Originally posted by: Stark
I refuse to believe that this little sect was able to rise to worldwide prominence with billions of followers without some sort of divine force behind it. Humans just aren't that good at pulling off such things on their own.

Quite frankly, the same can be said about Islam. This fact is attested to by numerous notable non-muslim scholars.

 

[BEL6772]

Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda
As the topic summary says, how can Jesus die if he is God? Or is Jesus not God? According to Christian scholars, the disciples of Jesus were convinced that he was fully God in human form. Doesn't the Bible also quote Jesus as saying "I and the Father are one"?

He inherited mortality from his mother. He inherited immortality from his father. After suffering on the cross, he used his mortality to die. His spirit left his physical body. On the third day, he used his immortality to rise from the grave. His spirit was reunited with his physical body. His resurrection broke the bands of death and opened the door to eternal salvation.

 

[GreatBarracuda]

Originally posted by: sao123
Unlike all the Angels & Disciples (specifically John & Peter) who all explicitly refused any form of being worshipped, Jesus allowed himself to be worshiped. Either that would be blasphemous(and would face the wrath of his father, or he must again be God.

In context:
29And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

30And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
This is a reference to Deut 6:4, laying claims to the religion of the OT jews is a monotheistic religion compared to many of the other religions being polytheistic in the land at that time. In both places, Often this passage is written as: The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.

Indeed it is a reference to the Torah. And Jesus, being the confirmer of the Torah, reiterates the message here to his followers that they should worship the one, true God and that means associating none in worship with him, including Jesus himself. You can't look at this verse in any other way, the meaning is quite clear.

Originally posted by: sao123
Perhaps you might like to address a few of the passages i quoted?

As I said in my latest post, sure there are passages in the Bible that depict Jesus as being divine. But the Bible has been changed to such an extent that the human additions are ... clearly human at best They (the later additions) contradict the old testament and its message of monotheism so vehemently that it is clear to any independent observer that these are human interventions. I can thus avoid all argument as to the claim of Jesus' divinity by pointing out the inconsistencies in the Bible and its corrosion over the years.

But that would be taking the easy way out.

The word of God is perfect. Any guidance from Him is complete and clear. I have pointed out enough inconsistencies/contradictions in the Bible between the pronounced remnants of the concepts of monotheism from the old testament and the human innovations that occurred later to show that the Bible today is not the true message revealed to Jesus by God, but a heavily modified version of it.

And this is not including the losses in preservation (and hence the vulnerability to modification) that has damaged the credibility of the Bible as the perfect word of God, albeit a divinely inspired and sacred text, nonetheless.

 

[GreatBarracuda]

Originally posted by: BEL6772
He inherited mortality from his mother. He inherited immortality from his father.

Father, mother ... ? Let's not forget that Mary was a virgin. This makes it sound too much like we are talking about a married couple

Originally posted by: BEL6772
After suffering on the cross, he used his mortality to die. His spirit left his physical body. On the third day, he used his immortality to rise from the grave. His spirit was reunited with his physical body. His resurrection broke the bands of death and opened the door to eternal salvation.

Almost sounds as if you are trying to explain it away in any way that seems to work

 

[aplefka]

I cannot believe this is a question that is really being asked.

A) It takes some testicular fortitude to ask/talk about anything related to religion, especially Christianity on this board.
B) I guess I take it as common knowledge having learned about my religion.

 

[ActuaryTm]

Originally posted by: aplefka
I cannot believe this is a question that is really being asked.

Having read a majority of the responses, I think it can safely be concluded that it was never a question, but rather an avenue to begin a discussion/debate.

 

[kinev]

Well, GreatBarracuda, you seem intent on proving that Jesus was not divine. You say he was a messenger of God, but not God himself. It is also apparent that Nik was right all along. You are not asking a question out of curiosity, you are asking a question to start an argument. Not a total Troll, but definitely troll-esque.

You yourself are quoting scripture to back up your points (along with a very impartial Islamic site) so it seems that you accept the Bible as a valid source.

There is ONE God. He has three aspects (personal aspects): Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Jesus was fully God and at the same time fully man. How is this possible? It just is. I don't think that anybody on Earth can fully comprehend the Trinity or Jesus' duality. Definitely impossible concepts for man to fully understand, but they are fundamental in Christianity.

So, you say that:
"We can find examples of this fact in the New Testament that Jesus never explicitly made claims of divinity and always considered himself to be the servant of the one true God."

Well, bobsmith1492 already pointed out a major one in John 10:30. Jesus himself states that "I and the Father are one." Okay, Jesus just explicitly made a claim of divinity.

There is also John 17:20-23 "My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me." Explicit claim #2 and #3.

There is also John 14:5-11 "Thomas said to him, ?Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?? Jesus answered, ?I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.? Philip said, ?Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.?
Jesus answered: ?Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ?Show us the Father?? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves."

Explicit claims #4, #5, and #6.

Okay? Since we are both using Scripture as a reference, we both accept it as valid. Jesus makes MULTIPLE explicit claims to be God and many indirect claims (miracles, forgiving sins, accepting praise, etc).

Using C.S. Lewis? argument, Jesus said he was God. This makes him one of three things: Liar, Lunatic, or Lord. You claim that Jesus was a humble servant of God and a prophet. Jesus had many followers and was never accused of being crazy by the Pharisees. Almost all scholars recognize a historical Jesus who was a great moral teacher. Well, only one option fits. A servant of God and a prophet wouldn't be a liar or a lunatic. 11 of the 12 disciples would not be tortured and put to death for a crazy person or a liar. Jesus had to be Lord.

If you are really interested (it is painfully obvious to everybody that you are not) in learning more, I suggest "Doctrines that Divide" by Erwin Lutzer. It has a great look at the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ.

Oh yeah, #1 Longest first post ever.

 

[aplefka]

Originally posted by: ActuaryTm

Originally posted by: aplefka
I cannot believe this is a question that is really being asked.

Having read a majority of the responses, I think it can safely be concluded that it was never a question, but rather an avenue to begin a discussion/debate.

Are you in Ventrilo tonight? Is anyone? I haven't been able to make it the past couple days, been working too much on school.

 

[Sophia]

Even though I'm familiar with this type of reasoning, it still sometimes sounds to me rather like God became incarnate in order to save us from His own requirements. Why not just forgive the punishment for our sins?

Originally posted by: bobsmith1492
However, He was the one who created us, and loves us incredibly more than we could ever understand. For this reason, He sent His only Son to take our own punishment on Himself. We cannot pay the punishment for our own sins since it is physical and spiritual death. That's why Jesus had to die; like someone mentioned, the Jewish tradition of sacrifices was part of the Law, which was provided for us to follow in order to be right with God. However, he knew we could never follow the Law; in fact, it showed us how truly sinful we actually are. That's why He had to send His Son. He was punished in our stead so that we could be "redeemed," that is, be right with the Lord spiritually once again.

 

[ActuaryTm]

Originally posted by: aplefka
Are you in Ventrilo tonight? Is anyone? I haven't been able to make it the past couple days, been working too much on school.

Not tonight. Tried logging in a few times, but was having some connection issues (inclement weather here today); have since been busy doing a bit of paperwork and attending to other important tasks.

 

[kinev]

Originally posted by: Sophia
Even though I'm familiar with this type of reasoning, it still sometimes sounds to me rather like God became incarnate in order to save us from His own requirements. Why not just forgive the punishment for our sins?

Originally posted by: bobsmith1492
However, He was the one who created us, and loves us incredibly more than we could ever understand. For this reason, He sent His only Son to take our own punishment on Himself. We cannot pay the punishment for our own sins since it is physical and spiritual death. That's why Jesus had to die; like someone mentioned, the Jewish tradition of sacrifices was part of the Law, which was provided for us to follow in order to be right with God. However, he knew we could never follow the Law; in fact, it showed us how truly sinful we actually are. That's why He had to send His Son. He was punished in our stead so that we could be "redeemed," that is, be right with the Lord spiritually once again.

Because God is Holy. He is perfect, so the only standard that would be acceptable for him would be perfection. If God just forgave everybody for all of their sins, he would be unjustly allowing everybody into Heaven. God cannot be unjust. If I was a judge and I let all of the defendants before me go free without paying their debt to society, would I be a good judge? The problem is, that with God as the judge, the standard set is perfection, which nobody can attain. That's why Jesus died for our sins.

 

[BEL6772]

Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda
As I said in my latest post, sure there are passages in the Bible that depict Jesus as being divine. But the Bible has been changed to such an extent that the human additions are ... clearly human at best They (the later additions) contradict the old testament and its message of monotheism so vehemently that it is clear to any independent observer that these are human interventions. I can thus avoid all argument as to the claim of Jesus' divinity by pointing out the inconsistencies in the Bible and its corrosion over the years.

But that would be taking the easy way out.

The word of God is perfect. Any guidance from Him is complete and clear. I have pointed out enough inconsistencies/contradictions in the Bible between the pronounced remnants of the concepts of monotheism from the old testament and the human innovations that occurred later to show that the Bible today is not the true message revealed to Jesus by God, but a heavily modified version of it.

And this is not including the losses in preservation (and hence the vulnerability to modification) that has damaged the credibility of the Bible as the perfect word of God, albeit a divinely inspired and sacred text, nonetheless.

OK. Your arguments are logically sound. The Bible no longer reflects the word of God, so we are free to find the passages that match our own views and feelings about God and His creation.

That one seems to cut both ways though. Since there are inconsistencies, what support is there for one view over another? Why is it not just as valid to argue that the Old Testament has been stripped of passages that support the ideas promoted throughout the New Testament? Can we not hold the New Testament as the more accurate view and discount the passages that seem to contradict it?

I think that we need to rely on more than our own logic to be religious. I believe the way I do because it feels right. I understand that the logic I develop as a consequence of my feelings will be illogical to some. I also realize that what I see as illogical was developed as a consequence of another's equally strong feelings. Ideally we can share our thoughts and feelings and grow stronger. Since the topic is so reliant on feelings, though it seems much too easy to end up with hurt feelings instead.

 

[Stark]

 

[Stark]

Originally posted by: Stark

Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda

Originally posted by: Stark
I refuse to believe that this little sect was able to rise to worldwide prominence with billions of followers without some sort of divine force behind it. Humans just aren't that good at pulling off such things on their own.

Quite frankly, the same can be said about Islam. This fact is attested to by numerous notable non-muslim scholars.

which goes back to the covenant(s) God made with Hagar and Ishmael... not that Islam accurately portrays the covenant, but it can still be considered a "great nation" as promised.

like I said, when God makes a deal, he sticks with it.

I guess it ultimately comes down to if you believe Jesus claimed to be the "I AM" of the Patriarchs or if that part was made up and inserted into the story by his followers. If he did make that statement, he was either a horrible blasphemer... or he was who he said he was.

 

[housecat]

Originally posted by: Nik
:roll:

If you have a serious religious question, go ask your local pastor. Don't ask the hoards of fvcking asshats on a computer forum that flame Christianity -not religion, just Christianity.

Ditto.

And ppl here dont really even know.. they might think they know.. but this place is ENTERTAINMENT.

Most here are KIDS or LOSERS, and whatever category they fit in.. they are almost always social outcasts.
Seriously. You can always spot the greasy fa*s by their relentless rebel yells against God and Christ.

Next thing you know, they're shooting up their school like this WINNAR!!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7275159/

CHECK OUT THOSE REBELLOUS DEVIL HORNS!!! WOOT!
I'm sure there are alot of greaseballs here who love that!
HOPE YOU ARE ROASTING IN HELL BUDDY!!! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Ask computer questions here. Christianity is best left to the people who have studied it.

Find a religon major at LEAST.. those can be found at any major university.
Or better yet, go into a christian church.. in general I'd recommend any protestant or catholic church.

Catholic if you want what is generally considered the "old view".. and protestant for what would be a more progressive new view on this. I'm a Methodist, but I find myself agreeing more and more with Cathlolic viewpoints.. I would say any Christian church would work.

 

[GreatBarracuda]

Originally posted by: kinev
You yourself are quoting scripture to back up your points (along with a very impartial Islamic site) so it seems that you accept the Bible as a valid source.

I think it is important to point out that it is not I who is preaching the Bible. What you say in defence of Jesus' divinity is itself refuted in the Bible! The onus now goes to you to prove to me that the Bible is the unadulterated word of God. Otherwise we would have to accept the later human additions which take away from the credibility of the original message Jesus came with.

Originally posted by: kinev
There is ONE God. He has three aspects (personal aspects): Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Jesus was fully God and at the same time fully man. How is this possible? It just is. I don't think that anybody on Earth can fully comprehend the Trinity or Jesus' duality. Definitely impossible concepts for man to fully understand, but they are fundamental in Christianity.

You see therein lies the paradox. How can you call someone God who is actually three? God, by His nature is alone in His divinity, otherwise how can He be God? He is omnipotent, omniscient and all-knowing. If you associate anyone with Him in His divinity, that takes away from the attributes mentioned above. He is then no longer all-wise, all-knowing and all-powerful, because there is now someone else who is just as great as Him. The God you describe to me is not the God of Adam or Noah or Abraham or Moses. They believed in the ONE true God. The old testament can prove this fact beyond the shadow of a doubt.

It is for this reason, that the trinity is logically flawed. Does religion have to be logically sound? To an extent, yes. One would expect a fundamental concept (the trinity) of a faith to be simple and free from any convoluted philosophy. If it is paradoxical in nature and confuses onself more than assures him of a better spiritual life, what appeal does it hold for the masses?

Again, in my view, it is important for Jesus to teach the same fundamental concepts that all prophets of God have taught and upheld and suffered greatly, as a result of it. The beliefs attributed to Jesus today show him to be a radical and deviant from the path which all other prophets of God have walked before him.

After all, it only makes sense that the righteous and noble sons of Abraham also believe in the same, one and only God as their father?

 

[Kev]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: brigden

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: spidey07
jesus wasn't god. He died for our sins to return by his fathers side.

'least that's what I remember.

:shocked:

oh man :roll:

It's so hard to hold my tongue.

Fuck off. Not everybody is an expert.

It doesn't take an expert to read the goddamn book.

hahah, you called the bible a goddamn book.

 

[CVSiN]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda

Originally posted by: Nik
We've tried many, many, many times. Asshats refuse to leave it alone. They fvck up serious, legitmate threads with their childish insults.

But you're not one of them, right? So why don't you take an attempt at answering this question for me?

Considering the post I just quoted, it seems to me as though you're not interested in learning, just arguing. If you want to talk about it, I'm all for it, but I won't do it here because of the profound lack of respect of religion on these forums. Oh, and you'll have to pry open that closed mind of yours.

Well, the "asshats" come in here with a preconception and argue until someone like-minded confirms it. You wouldn't be much different either if you think that I have come here to argue before we have even started talking about the matter at hand. My mind's open to ideas ... is yours?

Don't even start with me :roll: I'm one of the biggest defenders of religion on these forums. However, thanks for afirming my charge of your just wanting to argue instead of legitimately learn. :thumbsup: Looks like you're just looking to bait a flame war.

Nik everyone here knows we dont need any bait for you to flame =P

 

[Sophia]

Originally posted by: kinev

Originally posted by: Sophia
Even though I'm familiar with this type of reasoning, it still sometimes sounds to me rather like God became incarnate in order to save us from His own requirements. Why not just forgive the punishment for our sins?

Originally posted by: bobsmith1492
However, He was the one who created us, and loves us incredibly more than we could ever understand. For this reason, He sent His only Son to take our own punishment on Himself. We cannot pay the punishment for our own sins since it is physical and spiritual death. That's why Jesus had to die; like someone mentioned, the Jewish tradition of sacrifices was part of the Law, which was provided for us to follow in order to be right with God. However, he knew we could never follow the Law; in fact, it showed us how truly sinful we actually are. That's why He had to send His Son. He was punished in our stead so that we could be "redeemed," that is, be right with the Lord spiritually once again.

Because God is Holy. He is perfect, so the only standard that would be acceptable for him would be perfection. If God just forgave everybody for all of their sins, he would be unjustly allowing everybody into Heaven. God cannot be unjust. If I was a judge and I let all of the defendants before me go free without paying their debt to society, would I be a good judge? The problem is, that with God as the judge, the standard set is perfection, which nobody can attain. That's why Jesus died for our sins.

If we look at the God as Judge image, how is just for God to allow an innocent to serve the sentence of everybody else? An omnipotent God can't grant an universal pardon because (in the words of Billy Graham among others) "God's holiness requires punishment for our sins" BUT He can become human in order to take the punishment for us that His nature requires??

 

[kinev]

I think it is important to point out that it is not I who is preaching the Bible. What you say in defence of Jesus' divinity is itself refuted in the Bible! The onus now goes to you to prove to me that the Bible is the unadulterated word of God. Otherwise we would have to accept the later human additions which take away from the credibility of the original message Jesus came with.

Okay. That is a different argument, then. If you say that the Bible has been changed from God's original intent by men, then don't quote it to say that Jesus is not divine. Who's to say that the verses you were quoting haven't been altered as well? Why are you quoting a "supposedly" flawed source to back up your claims? It is clear that Jesus says he is God according to the Bible, as referenced by his numerous explicit claims. Saying that the Bible is flawed is a separate argument. Who's to say that the Koran isn't flawed as well?

You see therein lies the paradox. How can you call someone God who is actually three? God, by His nature is alone in His divinity, otherwise how can He be God? He is omnipotent, omniscient and all-knowing. If you associate anyone with Him in His divinity, that takes away from the attributes mentioned above. He is then no longer all-wise, all-knowing and all-powerful, because there is now someone else who is just as great as Him. The God you describe to me is not the God of Adam or Noah or Abraham or Moses. They believed in the ONE true God. The old testament can prove this fact beyond the shadow of a doubt.

It is for this reason, that the trinity is logically flawed. Does religion have to be logically sound? To an extent, yes. One would expect a fundamental concept (the trinity) of a faith to be simple and free from any convoluted philosophy. If it is paradoxical in nature and confuses onself more than assures him of a better spiritual life, what appeal does it hold for the masses?

Again, in my view, it is important for Jesus to teach the same fundamental concepts that all prophets of God have taught and upheld and suffered greatly, as a result of it. The beliefs attributed to Jesus today show him to be a radical and deviant from the path which all other prophets of God have walked before him.

After all, it only makes sense that the righteous and noble sons of Abraham also believe in the same, one and only God as their father?

Hey, I admit that it is a difficult concept to fully understand. That does not mean that we can't grasp the idea, though. The Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are ONE. He is not three, he is One. Jesus is the God of Abraham just as much as the Spirit and the Father are. Jesus was prophesized all over the place in the Old Testament as well as his divinity.

Like I said, I don't think man can fully understand the concept of the Trinity, but that does not mean that it is all worthless. I look at it like the old board game slogan that "It takes minutes to learn, but a lifetime to master". I get the Trinity, but I am nowhere near fully understandng it. I don't expect to fully know everything about God. Doesn't even your Islam teach that we as men cannot ever fully know everything about God? We are finite and imperfect. How can we expect to fully understand everything about an infinite and infallible God?

Yes, Jesus was radically different from every other prophet from God. Even you can see this. That is because Jesus was not just another prophet. He was God. We go back to the fact that Jesus made claims that no other prophet has made. Liar, Lunatic, or Lord. The first two wouldn't coincide with the historical picture of Jesus. Too many followers and too many martyrs. Jesus was God.

Should religion make sense? I agree with you ; yes, to a point. Let's turn the tables. One would expect the pivotal point of a religion "to be simple and free from any convoluted philosophy". The central aspect of most religions is how do we get to be with God when we die. Christianity teaches that if we accept Jesus as our personal savior, then all of our sins are washed away and we will spend eternity with God in Heaven when we die. Brief, to the point, simple, and assured.

Islam (to the best of my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong) teaches that one must perform the 6 Pillars of Islam and be a good person to be with Allah. There is a heavenly score-card where the tally is kept. Your salvation under Islam is not assured. Do you ever know if you have performed enough or been good enough? How can I, a imperfect man, ever hope to "earn" my way into heaven with good works? As I said before, God's standard is perfection. If I even miss one prayer time or eat one meal at the wrong time of day during the wrong time of the year, then I am not perfect and I have not lived up to God's standards. This method sounds convoluted and it seems anything but simple. How do you know that you will spend eternity with God? I am 100% sure I will, are you?

 

[kinev]

Originally posted by: Sophia

Originally posted by: kinev

Originally posted by: Sophia
Even though I'm familiar with this type of reasoning, it still sometimes sounds to me rather like God became incarnate in order to save us from His own requirements. Why not just forgive the punishment for our sins?

Originally posted by: bobsmith1492
However, He was the one who created us, and loves us incredibly more than we could ever understand. For this reason, He sent His only Son to take our own punishment on Himself. We cannot pay the punishment for our own sins since it is physical and spiritual death. That's why Jesus had to die; like someone mentioned, the Jewish tradition of sacrifices was part of the Law, which was provided for us to follow in order to be right with God. However, he knew we could never follow the Law; in fact, it showed us how truly sinful we actually are. That's why He had to send His Son. He was punished in our stead so that we could be "redeemed," that is, be right with the Lord spiritually once again.

Because God is Holy. He is perfect, so the only standard that would be acceptable for him would be perfection. If God just forgave everybody for all of their sins, he would be unjustly allowing everybody into Heaven. God cannot be unjust. If I was a judge and I let all of the defendants before me go free without paying their debt to society, would I be a good judge? The problem is, that with God as the judge, the standard set is perfection, which nobody can attain. That's why Jesus died for our sins.

If we look at the God as Judge image, how is just for God to allow an innocent to serve the sentence of everybody else? An omnipotent God can't grant an universal pardon because (in the words of Billy Graham among others) "God's holiness requires punishment for our sins" BUT He can become human in order to take the punishment for us that His nature requires??

Yes. God himself paid the price of our sins on the cross. Jesus took the burden upon himself and died for everyone's sins. Of course, we as humans were supposed to be connected to God from the begining, but Adam and Eve messed that up when they sinned. Because of this, man is eternally separted from God. Jesus came to Earth as a perfect and willing sacrifice to reconcile us with God.

The only way the cross would work is if Jesus was God. The only way for Jesus' sacrifice to sanctify us is if he was a perfect sacrifice. God's nature requires us to be perfect to spend eternity with Him. We are incapable of perfection (as shown by the Old Testament's standards). So, yes, God took the punishment of our sins upon himself on the cross that his nature required. It isn't that God set his nature a particular way. God's nature is God's nature will always be God's nature. Jesus' sacrifice was just the only way for a sin-filled man to be reconciled with a sinless God. Was it fair to Jesus? Of course not, not by our standards at least. That is partially the point of Grace. It is not fair, and we don't deserve it, but God loves us so much that he did it anyway. How cool is that?!?!

 

[weezerdude]

Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda
As the topic summary says, how can Jesus die if he is God? Or is Jesus not God? According to Christian scholars, the disciples of Jesus were convinced that he was fully God in human form. Doesn't the Bible also quote Jesus as saying "I and the Father are one"?

The Terminator T-800 aka Governator went back in time to kill Jesus. But Jesus came back with a "phoenix down" he had and then said, "Peace out."

 

[GreatBarracuda]

Originally posted by: BEL6772
OK. Your arguments are logically sound. The Bible no longer reflects the word of God, so we are free to find the passages that match our own views and feelings about God and His creation.

It is not about my "feelings about God". It is about God's changless realities. His words never change, His laws never change. His call never changes. The same call of monotheism that has been proclaimed by his noble prophets throughout time. It is for this reason, that I reject Jesus' divinity and all parts of the Bible which profess it.

I have never said that I don't believe the entire book. In fact I would not be a Muslim if I did so as it is a strict requirement of Islamic faith to believe in the divine inspiration of the revealed texts of David, Moses and Jesus, i.e. the Psalms, the Torah and the Bible.

Originally posted by: kinev
Okay. That is a different argument, then. If you say that the Bible has been changed from God's original intent by men, then don't quote it to say that Jesus is not divine. Who's to say that the verses you were quoting haven't been altered as well? Why are you quoting a "supposedly" flawed source to back up your claims? It is clear that Jesus says he is God according to the Bible, as referenced by his numerous explicit claims. Saying that the Bible is flawed is a separate argument.

In addition to my response to BEL6772's comments above, what you are saying is no different. It is not a "different argument". I'm questioning the very authenticity of the Bible, and you are saying it is a "different argument"? There are NO explicit claims of divinity made by Jesus in the Bible. Some of his words, with a lot of effort, can be INTERPRETED as such, but there is nothing that can be taken as irrefutable proof, which is a necessary requirement. Furthermore, his miraculous acts cannot be used to portray his divinity because Jesus himself has said: ?By myself I can do nothing...? (John 5:30)

If you do want to argue to this end, I can say by the same token what of the miracles performed by Moses and the other prophets before him? Is it any less miraculous to part the sea at a strike of the staff than it is to raise someone from the dead? Is Moses also divine in this regard?

Let me point out to you that Christian scholars themselves have admitted the modifications made to the Bible. I can provide references if you are interested. I encourage you to read Shabir Ally's piece here.

Also, can you honestly say that the verses from the Bible I have quoted do not contradict the Bible of today? I can portary parts of the Bible and Jesus' sayings as truly monotheistic and you can use others to portray Jesus' divinity. On the whole, however, one cannot deny the clear contradictions in the book and the sheer differences in the two messages being preached in the Bible.

Originally posted by: kinev
Who's to say that the Koran isn't flawed as well?

God Almighty Himself. Infact God challenges any human being to disprove the veracity of his words, i.e. the Qur'an, in no less than four different occassions in the Qur'an in 2:23, 17:88, 10:38, 11:13.

The time of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was the time of the climax of the Arabic language. To the pagans of Arabia, the Qur'an presented a literary and poetic challenge. Had there been any sort of error in the Qur'an, grammatical or otherwise, they would surely have revealed it when the prophet (p.b.u.h) challenged them to do so. Had they been able to meet the challenge, Islam as we know it today might not have existed. Even today, Arab christians who are fluent with the Arabic language, its structure and grammar, have accepted Islam after simply listening to the recitation of the Qur'an on TV or radio.

For 1400 years no one has been able to meet this challenge and yet it is still open to men and women of intellect today, including you. Many of its claims have been proven scientifically and with each passing day and advances in science, its truth is only strenghtened. It is truly a miracle to behold!

Originally posted by: kinev
Islam (to the best of my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong) teaches that one must perform the 6 Pillars of Islam and be a good person to be with Allah. There is a heavenly score-card where the tally is kept. Your salvation under Islam is not assured. Do you ever know if you have performed enough or been good enough?

If you are trying to say that Islam's obligatory rites are a burden, then you couldn't be more wrong. They are so seamlessly integrated into a Muslim's life that they are anything, but an incumbrance.

Let me quote: "The Muslim must seek to remember God at all times. He must be mindful that everything he is, everything he does, everything he knows and understands, is due to the Mercy of God. In acknowledging this, he remembers the fact that death lies in wait and he does not know when he will depart from this worldly life."

This is why prayer is important pillar of Islam. To a believer, it is a blessing, a chance to connect with God, an opportunity to remember Him and a time to offer thanks to Him for His countless favours.

Originally posted by: kinev
How can I, a imperfect man, ever hope to "earn" my way into heaven with good works? As I said before, God's standard is perfection. If I even miss one prayer time or eat one meal at the wrong time of day during the wrong time of the year, then I am not perfect and I have not lived up to God's standards. This method sounds convoluted and it seems anything but simple.

Where did you get the idea that God's standard is perfection? God, Himself is perfect. The same cannot be said of His creation. And God knows fully well this fact as He is the one who created us! He knows our weaknesses and shortcomings. As a human being and servant of God, one can only try his best to fulfil the commandments of God and to follow the path of righteousness laid out by his noble messengers.

Originally posted by: kinev
How do you know that you will spend eternity with God? I am 100% sure I will, are you?

I know because God tells me in the Qur'an through the prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h):

?And when My servants ask you concerning Me, then surely I am very near; I answer the prayer of the suppliant when he calls on Me, so they should answer My call and believe in Me that they may walk in the right way. 2:186?

You see, being the creation we have the responsibility to obey God FIRST simply by virtue of the fact that He is God, the only magnificent being worthy of worship, and THEN He most assuredly responds with His infinite mercy and compassion. This is the 100% guarantee you ask for. This is what makes a Muslim work all his life in the hope of the good company of His creator in the hereafter. To a believing Muslim, and by believing I mean a truly believing Muslim, it is by no means a life of anxiety, but a seemingly endless wait to meet his maker.

 

[ActuaryTm]

Originally posted by: weezerdude

Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda
As the topic summary says, how can Jesus die if he is God? Or is Jesus not God? According to Christian scholars, the disciples of Jesus were convinced that he was fully God in human form. Doesn't the Bible also quote Jesus as saying "I and the Father are one"?

The Terminator T-800 aka Governator went back in time to kill Jesus. But Jesus came back with a "phoenix down" he had and then said, "Peace out."

King Arthur then congratulates Arnold for destroying Dr. Robotnik's evil army of Robot Socialist Republics. The cold war then ends.

Coming soon: Arnold v Jesus - Judgement Day