As a man who read the bible and tried to follow it to the best of his ways, I cannot say I am bias to a particular extreme.
Whilst I read the Bible I found Jesus to be a great man, unusual man, a man beautiful in many ways, a man with a closeness to God, a reletionship which was ideal. To me I found in the Bible Jesus to be: a man accredited by God to people by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among people through him, as you yourselves know.
As I read, and tried to neutralise myself from any type of predispositions I found that the 'proofs' that some use to say Jesus is God do not actually neccesitate that understanding, unless someone is forcing that into the scripture. Whilst if we go with the whole of the Biblical Text then we see that Jesus not being God would to more justice to logicality and context.
That's my view for all it's worth.
Though it's still yet to be proven that the Bible is an accurate representation of the 3 years and abit of Jesus' life.
Eesa.
I only cut and paste that one article by Fred that got you most upset with me if you were upset.
I am not so sure of anything.
There is a danger for me to be communicating here too.
I could be led astray if I am not prayed up and staying in the Scriptures.
But please don't confuse my meekness for weakness.
I really do respect you all. And I have learned a lot from you and that God has placed a call on the Arab nation which I believe is at the root of Islam or at least through whom the word came.
I am broken about all of this. I shouldn't say anything that disrespects your believe. I am sorry to tears.
I just can't get my mind of Christ. I also believe there was a call on Israel from whom the seed of Jesus comes, but even they reject Jesus as their King. My words aren't fancy and technical but I believe they are with power in the Holy Spirit as long as my conscious is clear and I trusting and obeying all that I know that God wants me to do.
Sincerely,
AJ
since you never stick to the point, this really is the last post addressed to you.Some things we can infer from the Bible. Everything doesn't always have to be spelled out. The Bible says that he that has the Son has life; he that has not the Son as not life. From that, we don't need to infer nothing. It is explicit. People may choose that not to mean eternal life. I don't want to take the chance to find out. Not having life sounds pretty ugly to me.
Jesus is the Only Son of God who was crucified for my sins, and he rose again on the third day. Jesus has been given all authority and power over heaven and Earth.Eric
Who is Jesus to you?
Greetings Eesa.
This is probably review for you, but I need to ask. What is your perspective regarding the thought that there is no proof the Bible does NOT represent accurately the three years of Jesus'(pbuh) life. We do not have scripture from God's mouth or Jesus' pen.
Please give it to me one issue at a time if you can. I tend to get lost in the long, multiparagraph replies I sometimes get.
Most here are greater sources of knowledge than I am, and I have difficulty following it seems.
Thank you for your patience and peace.
Howdy Don, Hope you aite.
Let me 'rephrase' your questions, so I can see if I understood your questions right, correct me if I have now.
1. What's your view on the position of some who say that there is no proof that the Bible does not represent accuratly the three years of Jesus, peace be upon him's, life?
Am confused if you then are just telling me, is it because 'We do not have scripture from God's mouth or Jesus' pen.'?
Am alittle baffled there. Sorry please be patient with me.
Eesa.
I'm fine, thank you. Just got back from day with my son.
You're patient with me so much, the least I can do is clarify to return the favor of being patient.
What I mean is, there's no version of scripture that says Jesus lived three years claiming only to be a prophet. There's no existing old scriptures that when translated change any basic messages in the Bible. What proof is there that it's been changed? The list of 101 contradictions I've seen just doesn't wash with me. There's 101 refutations also.
Even the idea that Paul went about changing the gospel to fit his needs. I'm sure the other 11 would have reigned him in once they saw he was not representing the three years they all spent with Jesus.
Your thoughts?
Thanks once again.
Just poking my nose in and adding my 2 cents. All I know of Paul in the NT is from the letters he wrote to the various church heads. so I know that by the time of Paul, Christianity had taken on the role of an organized religion separate from Judaism. It does look like Paul was very instrumental in bringing about this change.
I could be wrong, but I can not find any reply that any Bishop, Apostle or whatever had ever written back to Paul. Can you point to one sentence where a single Apostle acknowledged agreeing with Paul?
It depends what influence God has on Paul’s letters and I do not believe that Paul's letters are in conflict with the rest of the BibleA challange, Seperate the letters of Paul from the NT, compare those letters with what the Apostles wrote, is the Christianity of today more like the letters of Paul or like the writings of the apostles
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.