Why do you men think people are leaving it nowadays…? What are some of the reasons that you men think people simply don’t believe it anymore, or no longer find it attractive…?

Don’t know for sure. But it may be the hypocrisy of Christians supporting homosexuality and such.

2 Timothy 3:1-5 ESV
But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power.

Inane threads are destroying Western Christianity.

IMO - people leave religion, most often, because it's hard. It asks for self denial and like most animals, our default condition is to simply satisfy any/all desires.


It's easy to follow a standard when there isn't an alternative. Add temptation (which the world is doing at an accelerating rate) and suddenly the ask seems harder to accomplish. It gets hard - you rationalize the reason why you no longer want to participate and you bail.

I think your question is wrong...

It is less that people leave God... but more that they allow clutter to be placed on top of their Faith by others (...or themselves).

If you can be distracted by a shiny object... my associate can steal your wallet... or Soul.

Yep. That and ammo manufacturers not loading a bunch of 35 Remington and 44 Russian.

Because people are waking up and realizing all religions are a hoax/cult. They can choose if they are atheist or agnostic and not be burned at the cross. Right?

Also, All religions have the same basic principles/concept. And everyone believes their religion is right one. The idiocracy is baffling.
Do you also believe Harry Potter magic to be real? No? But the magic in bible is real! ….. Got it!
and my favorite is we have all met that one or few righteous Christians or Catholics that are a giant POS. But on Sunday’s they are all forgiven.

Sin.

It’s washed out when the woke culture is allowed into the church

Women preachers

Gay pastors

Gay weddings

Not kneeling the whole time and church services in English instead of Latin was a good change.

The central leadership of many denominations have been infiltrated and corrupted. It's almost to the point that in order to find a church that doesn't have a corrupt central governance, you have to go non denominational,...and you have to choose carefully even then.

I believe that just 50 years ago, 90% of Americans identified as Christian. Today that is below 50%.

The turn of making "churches" as businesses has turned people away IMO. The business model is now 14 minutes of praise and worship, less than 40 minutes of a sermon, no longer a call to alter, and making sure the coffee bar has expresso. And definitely no talk of the hard stuff, like working for what you want, LGTQLMNOP stuff.

It's all about feeling good, and nothing about being convicted to something greater than "self".

In a world that is now all about self, faith is about less of self and more of Christ and that becomes very difficult for people.

Now is more important than the future.

antlers;
Morning sir, I trust your Monday is going as well as possible and you've had a decent weekend.

If I may, I'll state up front that I have a tough time figuring out why I do the things I do daily and as it has been pointed out to me many, many times in life, my ability to empathize with anyone else is absent for the most part.

Growing up in a small rural evangelical but pacifistic church where half the congregation was related in some way, I rejected the church and Christ when I was 15 because of the hypocrisy I saw in the lives of the church attendees. My statement or thought was more or less, "If being a Christian is acting like Uncle _____ or Aunt ____, then I want no part of it".

So I left the church, rejected my former beliefs and shortly after that I had the car fall on me when I was working under it. Since I've posted that here a couple times, I'll just say the short version is that "something" lifted the car off of me - miracle #1 - and once family got me to the hospital the top medical experts gave me only a slim chance at surviving and zero chance of full recovery - miracle #2.

Possibly from my mostly Teutonic lineage, I continued to rebel against what I believe was direct Divine Intervention in my life for the next nearly 4 years. Nobody has ever accused me of being the sharpest knife in the drawer - ever...

The best way I can articulate the cause for my rebellion was that it would require me to admit I owed a debt to a Higher Power and if I chose to be a servant it'd mean I would have to make an honest effort to change for the better.

Please don't misunderstand this for me believing that I can in any way, shape or form earn Christ's love for me and the gift of salvation, but for me personally, I really take the book of James to heart which - to me - indicates we should outwardly manifest a positive change for the better.

That's hard for a number of reasons for me personally, it takes daily effort and some days I don't feel like making that effort.

On some levels and with some actions I'm fine with taking responsibility for my actions, again that whole German thing likely, but it's tougher for me to rein in the noncharitable thoughts I have towards many of my fellow humans. I'm commanded to love them antlers and I don't even like them.

It has helped me in my spiritual journey to focus on my own actions and to not look for hypocritical behavior in anyone else. That's between them and God when they cross over is more or less where I'm at with that antlers, but I do get there's areas where a church needs to deal with members whose actions are detrimental to it.

Reading back on this sir, I'm not sure I've answered your question or not exactly? Hopefully somewhat?

Thanks for making me think this morning and all the best to you this week.

Dwayne

I have heard the saying: "There are no atheists in foxholes". If you take the organized religion aspect out of it, the human experience IS hardwired to ask the same fundamental questions of existence.

BTW religion is not the same as spirituality.

In regards to the original question, the institution of organized religion has been displaced somewhat by the nanny state.

Me personally, when I look at the amount of suffering in the world I pray that I can witness the end of times in my human existence on earth.

Religion is a form of control and as a result its as corrupt as politics. How are mega churches in business? Is no one actually reading the bible? If Jesus were alive today, he would be disgusted by what has happened and is happening in his name. Back when they were deciding which books to put in the bible and which ones to toss, who made that decision? If you want to believe that God told them then hand all you money over to the mega churches, Joel Osteen needs a new private jet so he can get closer to the heavens and have more clear conversations with God. If I want to be reminded that there is a higher power, I will go out in the woods before sunrise and watch the world wake up. I am not going to sit in some church and have people tell me what to believe.

Splendid Dwayne.[img]https://images.knowing-jesus.com/i/mark-9-24-lord-i-believe-help-my-unbelief-black[/img]

I see more and more folks who are Christians leaving religion, not their individual relationships with God. There is a huge difference.

Even Jesus decried religion and He was a Jewish Theologian!

As is continually pointed out (and rightly so) by the atheists and agnostics here, religion has caused more human suffering and death than even Communism, and that's saying a lot!

Having a personal relationship with God, minus the religious laws, is the way God intended it to be. It's all right there in the Bible, which has been twisted for centuries by those who would obtain and maintain power and control.


Ed

That's a very good point. Atheists and agnostics never forgive nor are they ever forgiven by other Atheists/Agnostics.

Very relevant topic and interesting comments.

I think that there are several factors. One is that, in most of the "traditional" denominations, distancing behavior over time by younger parents has resulted in far fewer young people being involved in highly relevant Sunday school - and thus, not moving into church attendance and leadership. Not so much a factor in situations where the churches are more evangelistic and not dominated by denominational aspects.

As some have posted - other strong factors as well.

For reasons noted here by others, and other reasons as well, it is not difficult to understand why otherwise thinking people have distanced themselves due to inconsistencies/corruption/falsity in various organizational hierarchies. Most organizations by humans do this to themselves. Such propensity is Biblical.

One huge bonus over time may be that most true Christians will live the fact that Christianity at its root consists of a personal relationship with the Savior and a Triune God, and will demo this in their daily lives. And, with realization that willful and strengthening fellowship with others is a secondary, although often important, activity.

Then again, maybe I am way off base.

Too much in religion is all about what to do, when it should be all about how to think.

With the exception of maybe a handful or Trappist Monks, I think that's true of everyone.

Sometimes I think the Messiah put that whole, "love your enemy" requirement in there just so people would develop an understanding of how difficult, if not impossible it is to conduct yourself as a "perfect" human being.

I also believe that there's a form of connectivity between everyone that people aren't aware of. It's too much to truly understand, so the Messiah didn't attempt to explain it. He just gave instructions to be decent to each other so that our behavior doesn't damage that fabric that all of humanity makes up,......maybe?

I didn't read the OP's post as being about church.

APDDSN0864;
Top of the morning to you Ed, it's been much too long since I've said hello to you. I trust all is as well as can be what with all the strange days we're finding ourselves in.

I believe you might know I have a few members of my immediate family who are ordained ministers or have been involved in overseas missions, so I was at least able to observe the plusses and minuses first - second?? - hand.

IF church is done right, I believe that it should have a greater impact on the community around it than it might could do as individuals.

I've been involved with churches which in my opinion did that and some which didn't seem to.

We're told not to stop meeting with our fellow believers as well, so I'd say that's likely a good goal as well, should we decide to opt out of formal church attendance.

None of this should be taken that I've got any of this figured out Ed, it's merely where I'm at in the journey and nothing more.

All the best to you all this year.

Dwayne

When a person is down, and out, do they go to a bar for help?

Hookers and blow.

Bristoe;
Morning to you sir, I trust your section of Kentucky is having a decent winter and you're all well.

Thanks for your thoughts, I appreciate you taking the time to respond.

As I say, I'm really, REALLY poor at understanding other humans, but I do believe I'm called to make an effort to be a better person/servant today than I was yesterday. I like the way you put it - to be decent to each other.

Whether I am inclined towards making an effort to do that or not is another matter entirely isn't it?

Thanks again and all the best.

Dwayne

Can only speak for myself,

I was raised Baptist, not the southern fun kind, the northern, no-denominational, if you're having fun, you're sinning kind. Basically, the Christian Taliban.

Upon much reflection over the years, I just can't get over the nepotism, hypocrisy and fear mongering that went on. My mother once commented about a particular pastor that "when he gets to heaven, he sure is going to be surprised at how many people are there."

To keep this short, I'll say that I've lost my religion. I have no faith in man but have not lost my faith in God.

Christianity worldwide is growing.
https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/cwn/20...heists-charismatic-churches-lead-the-way

That it is declining in meriKa can be attributed to
1: like all “great” nations, we turned our back on GOD and are just the next Babylon

2: people realized that organized religion is NOT the church. The church is within us.

3: most love the dark. We love sin.

To those that want GOD out of the nation, you’re going to get what you want, we’ll see if you want what you get.

Dwayne,

Good day to you, sir! It's always a pleasure to read your posts and get your perspective. This "communication" medium is fairly good at passing on information, but it leaves a lot to be desired!

Too many people see Christianity and believe it to mean the same thing as "religion" and/or "church". They can contain elements of each other, but they carry their own separate meanings and it does make a difference!

My points, and problems, are with religion, not the "church". I will agree, there are many churches and churchgoers who walk the talk as it is intended. We are, indeed to NOT forsake the gathering of believers. We are the "ekklesia" aka "The Body of Christ" and as such are called to be a blessing to others through fellowship. Included in that "others" are believers and non-believers.

We endanger our own relationship with our Creator when we engage in "religion" for then it becomes all about us and our righteousness. We are called on to focus on our own relationship with God through Christ, not submit to "legalism".

I'm with you, Dwayne, it's a journey! For me, it just keep getting better and better!

Take care and let's stay in touch!

Ed

We had Bishop Tudor Bismarck at our church this year. He made it clear that Christianity is growing in his homeland of Africa, because it is all the people have.
People in that land are praying for miracles to cure a headache because there is no Rite-aid or CVS to run to and grab some Tylenol.
People in America are mainly complaining that the french fries at McDonald's are not ready in time.

This.

It is true that there is a lot of hypocrisy in the professing church as well as a lot of false shepherds that are fleecing the sheep which turns a lot of people off, but I believe people simply refuse to abide by the word of God because it constrains them from doing as they please. They feel that God's word is too strict and narrow so they chose to go the way of the world , the broad way which ultimately leads to destruction. I can understand being turned off by all the hypocrisy found in the professing church today but instead of judging Christianity by Scripturally inconsistent people, judge the people by the consistent word of God. People change, visible churches change but God never changes and neither will His word. At the judgment people will not be judged by other people or by ever changing human and worldly standard, but by eternal God and His unchanging word.

As far as the leadership of churches being horrible, I can only agree.

But it's like being American. Joe Biden is arguably our worst president ever. But I'm still as American as ever.

GOD isn’t the genie in a bottle.....

Christianity is becoming more and more associated with politics and allot of people don't like it.

“We hold these truths to be self evident “....

Absolutely correct!

However...We have covenants with God and those covenants include healing.
The folks in Africa understand what a covenant is and what it means. Most in this country and most of Europe have lost the concept of covenants and therefore lose out on the benefits of them.

Add in the faith and belief that we are called to exercise in with the promises of the covenants and you get blessed with healing. It really is as simple as that.

Ed

If Christians do not get involved in politics, do you think we even have any chance of making a difference, or are we just supposed to sit back, suck our thumbs and cry a lot?

This nation was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs and it is those same beliefs that have been neglected and diminished, leading us to where we are now. We need to get involved at even the lowest levels of politics and start making changes.

Again...do NOT mistake religion with relationships with God! A Theocracy, which is government based on religion, is just another form of tyranny. It is the principles of Christianity that we must uphold.

Ed

I think you're on it, Ed.

You can hand human beings the most perfectly configured institutions, such as our Constitution or the Gospel, and in short order they will corrupt it, pervert it, or mutilate it in some way. Subtly, at first, so as to fabricate an advantage or power over others, and then full force and without a care that others see through their facade.

There is nothing wrong with Christianity. There is great misunderstanding of what it essentially is. When you see Olsteen on the tube you're not seeing Christianity, you're seeing unbridled avarice...antichristianity.

I would say that the same apathy quite a few churches show towards politics is creating the apathy their members have towards the church and ultimately walking away.

You have pastor/priests/reverends scared to stand up and say "Abortion is wrong and you can not vote pro-choice and be in line with Christ's teaching" because they get scared of losing at the donation box. It's worried about inclusiveness rather than Truth. YES you absolutely accept all sinners but you do not accept their sin with them when they come into the church.

The Judeos and the Christians had a fairly serious schism here while back. Maybe you heard about it.

You can't stack their beliefs in the same basket.

Communisto-Republic.

See?,...that term doesn't make any sense either.

Jesus' Spirit is alive and well at the non-denominational church we attend in mid-MO. Our church is located in a college town and our attendance is a great mix of all ages with those under 35 probably representing a disproportionately large percentage of our regular attendees. Three services each Sunday with probably 1000-1200 total attending each week.

We have a contemporary, respectful, reverent and worshipful praise and worship service, followed by an expositional sermon by one of three solid, Bible believing pastors. We hear the word "sin" quite regularly - no ear scratching here. Our mission as a church is to intentionally introduce others to Christ. We have had over 20 baptisms this year alone. God is at work, in our church and in our state. It is gratifying to attend such a growing, vibrant church.

May God bless you all,

bludog

In Western culture, at least, kids learn to read by the third grade. Said kid can pick up any encyclopedea ( in our day), or keyboard and google up the physical laws of the Universe, and Natural History of the Earth.

People today do not need to believe the sun is Apollo racing through the sky on his chariot, or that Zeus expresses his anger through thunder.

Good observation. The shared "principles" of the founding are one thing. Politics is something else, and since being a a kid there has been increased use of that "Judeo-Christian" term for social and political expediency.

Yeah, and all those physical laws, just happened by some freak great lucky chance! Tell me which takes the greater faith!

ED, was writing as you posted your first one, so did not see yours until later. Some similarities. Thx.

Maybe not. But if they look around at what's going on in the country they *should* be able to believe in the presence of evil,...and if they have the ability to think just a bit past that, they're eventually going to figure out its origin.

That's when Romans 1, starting at verse 18 comes in handy. It explains in great detail what happens when a society turns its back on God and God gives them over to a reprobate mind.

Two millennia ago the Apostle Paul accurately described today's America.

It's a closely held secret that Christianity in strict Muslim countries is booming. In many of these countries, being a Christian is a death sentence if caught. Missionaries are risking death to get the word to them, especially the women, who are the most eager for the truth. The daughter of some people in our church spent several years inside one of these countries. She's been home for quite a few years now but still can't tell where she was. If word gets out of where she was, people are going to die. She said that people are hungry for the word and it's spreading like in the days of Rome.

I was a confirmed catholic & was told that I had to attend mass & the Sunday school lesson that followed as long as I was living at home. Never got anything out of it except boredom. Quit going as soon as I graduated HS & got my own place. Only go there for a funeral mass now. Oh, the priest raped my younger brother and my cousin when they were alter boys too, if that helps in my decision to quit going. His name is father Flanagan.

Most people regard sexual sin as just another sin, the same as the rest. I disagree. Check out this passage:

1 Cor 6:18 Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.
19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own,
20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.

That word BUT is big. It separates sexual sin from all the rest. It specifies that it's sin against the Holy Spirit. The only unforgivable sin (this isn't it) is against him. You don't mess with the Holy Spirit.

I understand what you are saying. I think I heard something about it.

The truth of the matter is that Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew. More specifically, a Rabbi, a Jewish Theologian. He never stopped being a Jew. He came to show us the true nature of God.
It was man and his failures which led the Jews down the wrong path.

The beliefs in God's love, mercy and grace are the same. The Jews, since Moses, have lived under The Law.
Christ came to fulfill that Law and remove all of us from under the curse of it. You can't forget the underlying principals of Judaism (not talking about the law!) nor how it was the basis for that thing we call "Christianity". That's why I refer to it as "Judeo-Christian".

Ed

I doesn't matter what men think about God's church. The church is alive an well. What we see and what God sees are two different things. We only see right now. He sees the whole story

Jesus said in Mathew 16:18 "And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Evil lurks in the heart of every man. Education is the key to man overcoming that evil. Religion is ONE form of education which can do so.

What about those who first followed the Messiah that God sent?. Were they Jews? Did they stop considering themselves Jews when they chose to follow the Messiah?

So,...if, as Christians are following the Messiah that God sent to show Jews the proper path to follow,...what can Christianity be other than the proper path of Judaism?

Paul, I'll believe was used by Jesus to take the Gospel to the Gentiles.

A human can't educate himself enough to not be human. Religion can educate a man on what his human failings are and it can encourage him to minimize them to the extent possible.

But no form education can fix the human condition.

It's a heady subject that takes a bit of pondering. It makes sense to an extent once one realizes that his human brain isn't producing his consciousness.

Very many people have inadvertently discovered that their consciousness exists independently of their brain.

They never think about things the same afterwards.

From Psalms and the early prophets, it was written that the coming messiah would be the rejected stone who would become the cornerstone of God's church. Jesus came exactly for that purpose and he appointed 12 apostles to spread his word among the Jews. He fulfilled the law by becoming the sacrifice to end all sacrifices. All of those 100's of pages of laws and rituals were fulfilled at the cross, never to be needed again.
However, as prophesied, the Jews rejected it. Jesus then picked a 13th apostle, Paul, and sent him to the gentiles. Paul was an apostle but different from the others. His entire mission was different. The gentiles had never been under the law before Paul and he made it clear that they still weren't. He worked hard to prevent the gentiles from being dragged back under the Jewish laws that had failed so badly. For the most part, that's us. Paul wrote much of the NT to the gentiles, us, telling us how to live for the Lord, separate from the man made rules of the Jews. Also, with Peter's vision, we were freed from the dietary laws of the Jews.
The apostles and church elders met at Jerusalem to decide how to deal with the new gentile converts. It was decided, with the word from the Holy Spirit, that gentiles were to avoid food sacrificed to idols, blood, meat that had been strangled, and sexual immorality. Outside of those rules, the gentile converts were given a free rein. Today, we are far freer from rules than the Jews had ever been.

Fulfilling the Abrahamic covenant that through Abraham ALL nations will receive the blessing.

That blessing was the original covenant that was lost at the fall.
It’s the theme of the whole Bible.....

But it wasn’t Paul, it was Jesus

There is plenty to criticize about the greater Church in America. It caters to the foundational problem which is that we are a self focused rotting society and don't want to hear about sacrificially loving God and others as yourself.

The Word lives and knows no borders; we are being vacated.

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming?

Why would people leave a particular church/congregation?

Look at some of the jack-wagons one has to put up with!!

But the only reason for fully and finally walking away from the One, would be because you were never one of His sheep!

His sheep know Him and they hear His voice and they follow Him!

They have been brainwashed since watching cartoons all the way through grad school that the earth is millions of years old and dinosaurs lived before man. That is contrary to God's Word. Men prefer believing a lie to the Truth so they leave.

If more pastors and Sunday school teachers and catechism teachers did a better job of Christian Apologetics there would be fewer leaving Christianity.

I don't think any of them are walking away from christianity because their church isn't hard line enough. I have never heard anyone say they were giving up christianity because their church was weak on what they consider core issues. They are walking away from that particular church to find one that they agree with more but they are not ditching christianity.

You need to check real history.

fuggin' White people

I would say that the theme of the whole bible would be to become one with God. Isn't that the whole reason for everything? What you say is technically correct about all nations receiving the blessing of the Gospel. I just think the main problem is that all that means to most people is a set of rules to live by and argue over. The gospel should be that God has made a way for you to be one with him.

Blasphemer!

I studied hard to learn all them different masses, the Holy Day ones, funerals, and of course the regular mass in Latin. Immediately upon becoming an altar boy they started saying masses in English. Made no sense to me. 2000 years and it was OK in Latin, now they gotta change it.


And kneeling, standing, kneeling, sit for a minute, kneel, stand, kneel, stand is good exercise.

I struggle with faith every day. I want there to be a god but my common sense side reminds me organized religion is the biggest farce ever created by mankind. Churches simply suck and most members are cliquish to say the least. Every religion believes it is their way or the highway.
If there is one god and perfect religion who is to say which one it is?

I’ll give them credit though, nothing like creating an imaginary person with made up rules telling people what they can or can not do. Then threatening them will hell if they don’t comply. Talk about forgiveness.

"Education" seems to be an overly broad term in this context.

I am not saying christians can't get involved in politics. Everyone should vote their conscience. Its when religious leaders tell people how to vote. They should be teaching people God's word and allowing those people to decide on their own. 61% of the American population supports legalized abortion. You tell people they can't feel that way and be a christian, they are likely to say fine I am not a christian. You say that theocracy is just another form of tyranny which I agree with completely but it almost seems like that is the end goal of some.

Everyone should be "Kingdom" voters. (meaning read, and seek to understand, the word that explains the path to the kingdom of God) Everyone voting their conscience, within a world view that teaches no illumination of conscience only an "individuals" conscience might be why we see the American society leaning to Amorality.

That is the story of the fall. We lived in the presence of GOD. (In your words we were one with GOD) We lost that. GOD immediately set in place our redemption at the fall.

Genesis 3:15


The law was pre Jesus, post Jesus grace. No need to argue about the laws.

The Abrahamic covenant was to bring that blessing to ALL the nations. As it was in the beginning.

I am grateful. John 3:16

My God is still living, those others are dead.

And this attitude is the problem right here folks.

People smugly spouting bullshit they cannot back up.

He's right.

Our culture has moved beyond the old idea that there is such a thing as evil in the world.

There is no evil, or at least no evil so powerful that some human program can’t overcome.

All that law and condemnation which brings about the need for grace and forgiveness just doesn’t suit us. It isn’t nuanced enough.

That is to say, the vast majority of people have a Rousseauean anthropology. They believe that human evil is not a matter of nature but nurture, and if we can just create the right conditions it’ll be cured. Where is room for the Gospel in that?

Sad thing is many in the Church believe the same thing and like to act religious but have surrendered so many biblical presuppositions they themselves don’t know why Jesus had to die to set the world right.

Add to that our constant need to be entertained and utter lack of willingness to make community with each other face to face and you have empty churches.

We need a religion and politics sub forum.

Where is Jesus’s body?
Surely the Pharisee ,Sadducee,and Romans didn’t want a story about resurrection . Jesus’s body would have proven once and for all the resurrection never happened. And it would have all ended right there.
But they couldn’t find the body because HE IS RISEN!
The apostles chose death rather than denounce Jesus.

One day you or a family member dear to you will be in need. I’ll bet you hit your knees and pray then....

JG is right

If you’re a non believer that’s fine by me, but even non believers ought to understand that a church that has nothing they believe enough to speak clearly and boldly is no church at all.

I'll disagree about evil. Billy Grahm.

Great question. I have not heard an answer to this yet.

Something caused all of this to happen. Self aware beings made out of meat didn't just spontaneously erupt up out a barren rock spinning through the universe.

Why? At a campfire people talk about all kinds of subjects. Don't open religion or political threads and you won't have to make a silly post.

One word. Evolution. The earth is an estimated 3 billion years old. Plenty of time for things to evolve or for other civilizations to drop off stuff to watch it grow and evolve.

We will have to agree to disagree. I know a dog or a horse or a cow have no conciousness. Not so sure about porpois, whales, and elephants.

I know a human develops a conscience as he matures after birth. I know that conscience fades away to nothingness and is no more as soon as electrons quit flowing in the brain.

You believe otherwise. That's okay. I would not try to convince you otherwise. The attempt would be to no avail anyway.

We will just have to agree to disagree.

No more mysterious than "Where did God come from?"

Paul was an advocate of female church leaders.
He praised Priscilla and Lydia as leaders in the early church.

Classic example is that 'real' Xtians don't believe
angel Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith...
but they believe their own Bible claims.

Thomas Jefferson, Issac Newton and Einstein
called bullschit on Bible miracle claims.

"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus,
by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will
be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the
brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason
and freedom of thought in these United States will do away
all this artificial scaffolding..".

{Jefferson letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823}

Newton was heretical in his beliefs , dismissing
the trinity and immortal soul among other things.
He would have lost his fellowship at Cambridge
Trinity college had King George not intervened
granting him an exemption to becoming ordained.


Mr.Einstein penned a letter to philosopher Eric Gutkind
((1954):

“The word God is for me nothing more than the expression
and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of
honourable, but still primitive, legends which are nevertheless
pretty childish.”

For me, it’s always been about the way churches preach group fellowship as almost being necessary to receive God’s blessings and guidance.

As if showing up in church is a way to prove your desire and a worthiness for God’s love.

Seemed to me that only proved a few things. Either someone enjoys being part of a congregation and wants to worship in a group. Or they want to be seen by others as a good Christian and use their attendance as proof of their commitment to Christ….Translation: Some are good people. Some pose as good Christians for show and tell out of personal pride.

People who find benefit in regularly attending a church, is cool. I’ve preferred to keep my spirituality between myself and God.

🦫

I just left a church after four years. It was a country club - nor a church. A nice place to make friends, eat lunch together and use the church gym together for basketball and badminton.

I have been in church all my life and will eventually find another church.

It was all about checking the boxes in regard to behavior, but totally ignoring the condition of the heart.

The church I just left has been dwindling in size due to conflict after conflict.

The members wonder why their teenage kids won’t attend the church - but never do any self examination.

Within the church, there are threats of lawsuits if certain people are selected for leadership roles.

I sat in a meeting of the leadership board - it was as if I were matching Matthew 23 (Jesus criticizes the Pharisees) unfold in front of me. Some of the board members were the biggest Pharisees you could imagine. They criticized people for not volunteering to serve with children so that a vacation Bible school could be held. Yet they themselves were unwilling to serve in VBS (they are retired - they have time). The board wanted to be standing in the pulpit any time communion was taken so that they could be publicly recognized. The board members wanted to be the ones standing in the pulpit to pray and have their name printed in the church bulletin.

There is a 3-year still-unresolved major fight over allowing a start up church (of the same denomination) use the building on Saturdays - because they were a different ethnicity (FYI - the ethnicity of the main church is only 2-3% Caucasian; the start-up church was Syrian Christians; I was one of only 5 caucasians in the church). Four board members have left the church, the missions director left the church and three pastors left the church because this request was refused and they themselves were attacked and slandered.

Board members made room deals made with the previous pastor - “I will support your budget request if you endorse me becoming an elder in the church.”

Contentious church meetings where disagreement results in some people standing up and calling other members evil. I have been called evil by multiple people, including the board members I exposed.

Some wealthy people did not like the pastor and offered him a substantial amount of money if he would resign from his position.

The denomination has finally stepped in and taken over governance of this church. Of course, this has brought threats of more lawsuits.

In case you are wondering what the primary ethnicity of the church - it is a Chinese Christian church. Just not very Christian.

Are people wonder why churches are dying. And they wonder why their kids are leaving the church.

Church is not a museum of Saints, rather a hospital for sinners.

Garhering in Church serves two purposes.
1 It keeps folks available for weekly brain washing reinforcement.

2 Without such gatherings, the coffers would become barren and priests thin.

Disagree with the zealot theology of some CF members
and they will brand you evil.

That was the motto of my parents’ church.

The best church I have been in had a very strong Bible-based 12-step program. One of their favorite saying was “it’s okay to be not okay; but it is not okay to stay that way”.

Sounds like my church, there's more broken people on the inside than there is outside

Maybe I just go to a unique church but there's no illusion of perfection amongst the pastors or the congregation. Of course there's always going to be people that put on a front or fight all the way to church on Sunday and hop out of the car saying "praise Jesus" with a smile on their face. That's just the way life is, we're all struggling. The message of Christianity isn't about perfection, it's about rebirth and forgiveness.

,...and you *still* lasted 4 years?!

There is a book with a great title that says it all: “When Bad Christians Happen to Good People”.

I've never been subjected to "brainwashing" in church.

Fallable people searching for a solution to their condition, a meaning to life and answers to unanswerable questions .....

When we put worldly conformity first and the Lord's cause second...

We go where our heart is.

Islam seems to be doing better these days

Newsflash.......people screw up everything they get involved with. Is this something new?

And yet people who can't believe that to be true turn around and in the next breath and profess their belief in a God that apparently sprang forth from nothing.

Attributing the creation of the universe to a god doesn't solve any grand mystery. Because the question simply shifts to, "Where did this god come from?" What made him?

God, an inexplicable explanation for an inexplicable question: the existence of a universe.

Because the vast majority of what is presented as Christianity ain't.

Between all the "new" translations of The Bible , The knowledge of what the Papists have been up to all along and what some of Gods chosen people are up to generally....

Dont get me wrong , I still believe , more than ever in fact.

It came to me that a God that can be as precisely defined as people say he is between two leather covers containing 1250 pages , is limited by the description within those pages and then limited again by how people interpret or comprehend the same ?

Even naming God is an attempt to define God and somehow places the limit of human comprehension on God as I see things. The Gnostics and Kabbalists hint at it.

The entity Ive come to believe in is without limit or parameter or definition. It simply "Is".

Nothing actual can be apart from "Is".

Is , is every atom , and the space between the particles. "Is" created the universe, remember?

This belief simplifies it considerably. My part is to be reverent, forgiving and grateful.

My part is to Love Is and treat everyone the way I'd want to be treated and I fail at that ,miserably , every day, if I were being honest. Learning to forgive others with the same short coming is where I'm trying to work in order that I may be forgiven. I suck at that too.

We are the journey, "Is" , is the destination.

Everything else is superfluous.

Others mileage will likely vary.

Between all the "new" translations of The Bible , The knowledge of what the Papists have been up to all along and what some of Gods chosen people are up to generally....

Dont get me wrong , I still believe , more than ever in fact.

It came to me that a God that can be as precisely defined as people say he is between two leather covers containing 1250 pages , is limited by the description within those pages and then limited again by how people interpret or comprehend the same ?

Even naming God is an attempt to define God and somehow places the limit of human comprehension on God as I see things. The Gnostics and Kabbalists hint at it.

The entity Ive come to believe in is without limit or parameter or definition. It simply "Is".

Nothing actual can be apart from "Is".

Is , is every atom , and the space between the particles. "Is" created the universe, remember?

This belief simplifies it considerably. My part is to be reverent, forgiving and grateful.

My part is to Love Is and treat everyone the way I'd want to be treated and I fail at that ,miserably , every day, if I were being honest. Learning to forgive others with the same short coming is where I'm trying to work in order that I may be forgiven. I suck at that too.

We are the journey, "Is" , is the destination.

Everything else is superfluous.

Others mileage will likely vary.[/quote





You should read the Tao Te Ching.

How does one "back up" a conviction based on faith?

Are you assuming that professing Christians are on a quest to solve some Grand Mystery?

It might be interesting to see and analyze your proof for the above.

By cutting off your head if you don't agree.

Western Christianity is empty, hollow, in disarray and has little offer. Anytime there's a fracture within a congregation, any jack-ass with a Bible under their arm can call themselves a "preacher" and is free to go out and reinvent it in their own image and start a new "church". Everytime that happens, it dilutes what The Church was supposed to be and becomes another degree removed from it.

Could have something to do with closet gay preachers and the fact that churches need preachers bad enough that they hire such and find out later

This is our teaching too. Although we do have saints on display.

My theory is the numbers have been inflated by the deceived Christians who believe they are Christian only because they attend Church on Sunday. Add a little sacrifice and it separates the chaff from the wheat.

In my opinion, there are more alternatives today, simply more activities one has access to. Not only on Sunday, but throughout the week the average family with kids stays busy, continuously on the go with sports and school related activities. More divorce, more single parents, more shuffling kids around on weekends, more stepchildren, etc. exacerbates the busyness. Come Sunday, they are just too darn tired to go to church. Most mistakenly associate Christianity with Church, because with them, it ends there. They were never Christians at all.

Never had much use for religion. After all, it was the religious order or the “church world” of the day that crucified Jesus. Not sinners.
Christianity, in a nutshell, is to repent of one’s sins and endeavor to live a life that follows the teachings of Jesus as closely as one possibly can.
I became a Christian four years ago this coming March even though I had been around Christianity all my life.
That’s a whole other story.
My father always told me not to worry about what others do as I would only answer for myself at the judgement and I believe that to be true.
Life at it’s longest is short but eternity is to long to be wrong.

I love how you talk like you’re fine with Christianity when such a “objective observer” posture suits your angle.

Your mask seems to have slipped with this one but don’t worry it didn’t hide your actual feelings anyway…

Don’t put on airs. At least Mauser9mm and DBT say exactly what they are.

The church already became diluted when Paul
relaxed the Rules of membership regarding
Torah compliance and he had no Bible under
his arm as we today know it, nor had he ever
known or met an earthly Jesus.


How can one prove anyone to be Xtian?


Late 4th century by time the state apparatus
decided on the content and then had to wait
till 15th century before the printing press arrived.
yet folks were still largely illiterate up until the
19th century..that's some amazing plan g0d
had for getting his word out.

Your question begs the question, do you have any concept of infinite? It's a nonsequter like, to whom is the bachelor married?

The God of the Bible is infinite. Infinite, unlike the universe, has no beginning, ending, or limitations.

Thank You to all who have participated in this thread so far with genuinely honest responses. To further the discussion: many of us have talked to, and listened to, and read interviews and blogs and books by dozens of people who’ve left the faith of Christianity. Do you men find it uncommon to hear a story from anyone who walked away from the faith of Christianity based on anything ‘directly’ related to the faith of Christianity itself ~ at least the original version anyway…?

Antlers my friend…Happy New Year.

By “walking away from Christianity” do you mean they left the “Church” or they left God too? I can’t say that I could find fault with a man for walking away from the church unless I knew what his church was like but I can’t wrap my head around walking away from God. I would venture to guess that if one walked away from God I would question if they ever truly walked WITH God. I think that if one has a true close and personal relationship with God, a relationship that’s as real as any other relationship and far more REAL than most, walking away from God would be like walking away from air, I couldn’t do it if you know what I mean?

Most of the churches around my area do not. Even the Methodists are splitting over it. A few are going down that road, and many of their members are heading down the road to other churches. All of this apostate teaching and blasphemy was predicted in the Bible, and there were warnings of false preachers for Christians even in those times. Stuff like this is nothing new.

Sounds like someone describing the 24hourcampfire people

Among the many faithful Christians encountered to date, I have never seen such beheading.
Please answer two inquiries. What is Western Christianity? What is the core definition of what "the church was supposed to be"? Thanks.

An empty tomb or lack of corpse is not proof of resurrection.
And a mere claim of 500 alleged witnesses (without actual first
hand testimony from them) doesn't hold water.
On the evidentiary scale it ranks way down low.

According to scripture Thomas touched the flesh of
Jesus in his earthly presence, so where did that flesh
and bone food eating version of Jesus end up?

Do you make the 'RISEN' claim as an article of faith
or historical fact?

Did you see the resurrection?

Different set of standards maybe?

I am pointing out the double standard of those who ridicule people over the notion that the matter and life of the universe could spring forth from nothing and develop on its own while simultaneously believing that a specific creator god, for which they have no evidence of, made the universe by some means they also fail to explain. If all things had to come from something then were did god come from? About the only answer you will get is the attempt to grant their god special exemption status and claim that he has always existed. Another convenient double standard as they also ridicule the notion that perhaps the universe has always existed in some form or another and that we are just currently living in its latest incarnation.

You may not like it but I'm just being honest. I do not know how the universe started. But here's what I can promise you, no one posting here knows either. Some like to pretend that they do based on a book written 2000 years ago by people who knew even less about the true nature of the universe than your average 3rd grader does today.

The special pleading fallacy is strong amongst believers,
apologists can spend their whole life trying to perfect the art.


Well, Theology is nothing more than a broad spectrum of mans subjective
mind theories about a mysterious unknowable g0d they believe to exist.

I’ll answer your question but you answer mine.
What is your worldview. Are you a Jew, satanist, agnostic, atheist ,Muslim, mason, other like the religion of science ?

So you don't answer questions already put forward until someone answers
your question you jumped the queue with?

What's with your sense of entitlement?

It’s clear what my worldview is here. I don’t hide anything.


Projection much?

No,sounds like you are just avoiding the questions
put to you and you want to keep dancing around them.

I come across enough childish Xtians as it is.

The great Satan is back.....
And you’re projecting again....

LoL..thanks for proving my point.

Ditto

Dude you are not here for honest dialogue
you just want to project your faith and condemn
others for not buying your brand of it.

The questions orig. put to you still stand.

Show me one post of mine where I condemn ANYONE for not buying into my beliefs. You made the statement
Prove it.
I’ll wait.....

Right after you answer the questions put to you.
But you seem fervently intent on dancing around them..

Now look who’s back to projecting again......

You have outstanding questions you refuse
to answer, so no point demanding others answer
your follow on questions.

I'd ask you to grow up but I wouldn't put hope
in that happening.

You just can’t stop projecting.

You made a bold claim. Prove it

I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

JeffP keeps jumping the queue with his demands
If he would only answer the Qs orig. put to him.
but his ongoing childish antics are taking precedence.

I'll put down to him being yet another Xtian coward.

Back and forth "did not - did too" arguments on a forum rarely make either poster look very mature.

Again with the projection.
When someone asks you a question it’s “what’s with your entitlement?”
Yet you feel entitled to demand others answer your questions.

So starman
You made the bold claim above. Prove it.

And why do you hide when asked about your worldview? Are you ashamed? Scared your worldview will not hold up to the same scrutiny you hold Christians to? Scared your worldview will not stand the same burden of proof ?

True
It’s clear starman avoids questions but demands others answer his. Christians should take note and walk away from any dialogue with him. I’ll take my own advice.

For me, this is all sort of abstract as I don't personally know anyone that has walked away from it in the past dozen years.

I do know a few that have left the church they were attending. Some changed churches, two I know of stopped going to church all together but haven't lost their faith.


One that I know that left church was Methodist, they were disgusted with the direction the Methodist church was headed.

Star man is not someone worth interacting with at all. He has no interest in an actual conversation.

Good morning Antlers

The question looked familiar. I believe that a similar question was asked not that long ago but directed at the church. As I thought about that discussion and the various ways related issues have been discussed I concluded that the answer is likely the same.

As I read through the thread and consider other such discussions it seems that many answers address symptoms rather than the cause. I’m left to wonder how we find the cause collectively. I’m not yet convinced that it matters enough to most that a cause is found.


Helen Keller is credited with the following statement. “People don’t like to think. If one thinks, one must reach conclusions. Conclusions are not always pleasant”.


To answer your initial question and the second question on page seven of the thread will require most if not all of the Christian readers of the thread to engage in introspection that requires personal change on several levels. That isn’t likely to happen even for yourself if the question isn’t embraced. Until we are willing to embrace the question at that level can it truly be answered? I don’t think that it can. Maybe it’s better to say that I don’t think that it will.

Literacy

That's a really good post.
God told us His name - "I Am Who Am". To me, that points out His omnipotence, eternality and infinitude. His infinitude is what I see a lot of people not taking into account. There's nothing too big, too much or too ...?? for Him.

Knowing all this, what should our response to Him be? In my mind, we should do as He asks to the best of our ability.

I find them to be in one of 4 basic camps.

1) The ones who worship humans and, when people who are part of the institutions charged with carrying out His instructions show their humanity, use the human failings as an excuse to ignore God's instructions. This is one reason they the Catholic Church has such a split over the new mass and the old Latin mass. The new mass encourages an attitude of worshipping people.

2) People who have suffered but lack faith in the redemption of suffering and become angry at God. Cain was a good example.

3) Lazy people who don't want to fulfill God's instructions and the related...

4) Prideful people who think they can do everything on their own or know better than God. The Tower of Babel was a great example of this.

The Tower of Babel is a grand example of what happens when you allow unlimited entry of "undocumented laborers".

Did you see the "Big Bang"?

I have not given up on God because I know he has not given up on me. I have given up on organized religion as I see it to be corrupt and self serving to its leaders.

God and the Big Bang are not mutually exclusive.

I said zero about resurrection. You are dodging the issue. The claim was that Christians will cut off heads. So, what is the basis for that claim?

"Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, " 1 Tim 4:1

If, indeed, you think that you are "pointing out the double standard" you actually are pointing at nothing in the thinking and behavior of those who do not ridicule others. None of the Christians I know engage in ridiculing folks who behave as do you. In that regard, you are setting up a straw man for your own ridiculing purposes. Please cease and desist from such disingenuous acts.

Again, you spoke of a grand mystery - your words: ("Attributing the creation of the universe to a god doesn't solve any grand mystery. ") So, in your words, what IS the grand mystery and who should be solving that one?

The Methodist screwed the pooch along time ago but there numbers were to great to see there funds being funneled to Africa and clergy the gay thing put the icing on the cake.

No, but there's a ton of evidence and scientific understanding and explanation to support that it happened, so strong in fact that it has scientific theory status. Resurrection - nil, nada, zip.

My standard uses facts, logic and truth. I have no need for faith especially where it contravenes the aforementioned qualities.

Consider if you had typed "Among the many faithful Christians encountered to date, I have never seen such resurrection."

The very fact is that I did not type that, or think it. I merely asked to see the basis for that boldly stated claim that "Christians will cut off heads". No basis provided so far - just dodging. Waiting, but for how long? What is it that the 5th graders say in such cases?

The difference is that you demand proof for one but not the other - two standards. Faith has special concession requiring no facts at all, and despite any and all facts to the contrary.

Would tons of historical evidence for the murder by Christians over the millenia be satisfactory evidence in lieu of Christian initiated beheadings, or is it a pedantic point that solely relies on beheading? Does failure to provide a beheading example negate and absolve Christians of all other murders? I didn't think so.

Your usual attempt at deception. I did not "demand" anything - that is your chosen term for deflection. You are trying to create a straw may by complaining that I will not demand something you want me to demand. That ploy will not work. Neither will that recitation of your version of "history". That blatant claim about beheading by Christians appeared above - applied to the present/future tense. Zero proof provided. Remember - the 5th graders will be yelling.

IZH27 (and others who are participating in this thread so far with genuinely honest responses): Do you see it that much of what makes the faith of Christianity in America so resistible and uninteresting and unattractive to those outside of the faith are things that those within Jesus’ ekklesia maybe should have been resisting all along…?
If Jesus’ ekklesia genuinely wants people to stop leaving the faith of Christianity ~ if Jesus’ ekklesia genuinely wants Christianity to be attractive again, and interesting again, and irresistible again ~ do you see it that maybe it’s time to take another look at the movement Jesus Himself started 2,000 years ago…?

Well, you keep researching your beheading concerns then, but don't get sidetracked by the tons of documentation of the atrocities, persecution, discrimination etc perpetrated by Christians over the millennia. Just remember it's only about beheading, nothing else matters.

Beheadings were typical in the early days by all religions.


The story of David and Goliath (1 Samuel 17) is a factual account from biblical history that demonstrates how the Lord intercedes for His people. David was a shepherd, the youngest of the eight sons of Jesse of Bethlehem. King Saul and his men were battling the Philistines, one of which was a 9-foot giant named Goliath. The men of Saul’s army were afraid of Goliath, and there was no one to stand up to him. But David, filled with faith and a passion for God’s name which was being blasphemed by Goliath, slew Goliath with a stone and a sling. Then he cut off Goliath’s head with the giant’s own sword. When the Philistines saw that their champion was dead, they fled before the Israelites, who had a great victory over them.

King David was grieved when his men thought they were pleasing him by killing and beheading Ish-bosheth, one of King Saul’s remaining sons (2 Samuel 4:7–8). The assassins brought the head of Ish-bosheth to David, expecting a reward. Instead of commending them, David was outraged that they had killed an innocent man in his own house. Rather than display Ish-bosheth’s head and reward his killers, David buried the head and had the men executed. David did not behead them but had their hands and feet cut off and displayed as a warning to anyone who would murder innocent men for political gain (2 Samuel 4:12).

Other beheadings in the Bible include the Egyptian baker, beheaded by Pharaoh (Genesis 40:20); King Saul, beheaded by the Philistines (1 Samuel 31:8–10); and Sheba, beheaded by the people of Abel Beth Maakah (2 Samuel 20:21–22). Abishai threatens to behead Shimei, but David forbids him (2 Samuel 16:9–10). Ashpenaz, the chief Babylonian court official, fears beheading by King Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 1:10). Of special interest is the “beheading” of the Philistine god Dagon. The Philistines had stolen the Ark of the Covenant and placed it in their temple of Dagon, “but the following morning when they rose, there was Dagon, fallen on his face on the ground before the ark of the Lord! His head and hands had been broken off and were lying on the threshold; only his body remained” (1 Samuel 5:4). The Lord God of Israel, in cutting off Dagon’s head, plainly showed His victory over all false gods.

Now let see what the Christians did.....

In the Catholic 17th century 30 years' war against the Protestants, at least 40% of population decimated, mostly in Germany. [K.Deschner, Opus Diaboli, Reinbek 1987.31-32] And It's recorded in the Catholics sack the city of Magdeburg/Germany, roughly 30,000Protestants were slain. "In a single church fifty women were found beheaded," reported poet Friedrich Schiller. [D.Stannard, American Holocaust, Oxford University Press 1992, 191.]

We see it in the slaughter of the Albigensians which was really the first Roman Catholic crusade intended to slay other Christians. [K.Deschner, Opus Diaboli, Reinbek 1987, 29]The Albigensians...viewed themselves as good Christians, but would not accept Roman Catholic rule, and taxes, and dictates. Then on the command of pope Innocent III in 1209, Bezirs (today France) was destroyed, all the inhabitants were beheaded/slaughtered. Victims including Catholics refusing to turn over their neighbors and friends were up to 70,000. [H.Wollschlger: Die bewaffneten Wallfahrten gen Jerusalem, Zrich 1973.179-181]


I say, just like our American Civil War....do not erase history, as we need to learn from it.

1931,Georges Lemaître was both cosmologist and Catholic priest, proposed the BigBang
based on actual observation of bodies in space and Vatican officials are on record stating
genesis/ Adam and Eve is fictional...basically a tall tale for child-minded simpleton folk.

I don't see how virgin birth and resurrection claims
would be any more credible than Adam-Eve and talking
snakes.

According to the rigorous standards that you place on what qualifies as truth or not I must ask you that surely you have seen those beheadings, atrocities and persecution firsthand….with your OWN eyes?….😂

Dipshit!

Of course not, and that's the blindingly obvious point that you've missed. There are plenty of historic recordings, and other evidence, researched, reviewed and verified by historians. It's not at all subject to your Christian incredulity, despite where your angry ignorance leads you.

The British still had a policy of beheading during the Malayan Emergency of the 1950s.
The head of the British Crown is also the head of the Church of England and troops
sign up in their contract to serve the Crown...Of course the British denied such allegations
until irrefutable evidence surfaced , then they defended beheadings as a necessary policy.

The current oath of allegiance:

"I swear by almighty God that I will be faithful, and bear true allegiance
to his Majesty King Charles III, his heirs and successors, and that I will
as in duty bound, honestly and faithfully defend his Majesty, his heirs
and successors in person, crown and dignity, against all enemies, and
will observe and obey all orders of His Majesty, his heirs and successors
and the generals and officers set over me."

To be sure, I do not have "beheading concerns" as you would like to believe. I may have concerns about posters who state crazy, unsubstantiated things and work disingenuously. Earlier in this thread, you were declared a phony and others were warned/advised to ignore your antics. So - - -

CCCC if you want to take the word of folk that believe
in religious mythology , go right ahead.

But here's image of Scots Guards operating
in Malaya serving God and King under oath.
The British Crown defended such
beheading policy.

Oprah Winfrey as an example. Oprah says she is a Christian, yet she has said at various times that she is her own God.

Some of the following groups: politicians, Hollywood stars, East Coast and California elites, do not want to be practicing Christians where there are behavioral restrictions.

It’s easier to be their own God where they can sleep with neighbor’s wife, abort babies, live a homosexual lifestyle, drink to excess and/or do drugs and not face any societal consequences. They determine their own religious norms.

Over time, the rest of society follows the examples of the above groups. As their own God, they don’t need traditional CChristianity.

We are feeling the effects of our tolerance of sin.

I made no claim about what your concerns
may or may not be, nor did you even warrant
a passing mention by me.
My post was clearly in response to Raspy
on the subject nothing more.

So why exactly did you respond?

I think I first mentioned beheadings. It was in response to a question about how you prove your faith. It was not directed at Christians, but many religions over time have proved their faith by beheading unbelievers.

The ones that got beheaded were the lucky ones. Christianity's favored method of intimidating heretics was to strip someone naked, tie them to a post a start a slow fire. All done in public with mandatory attendance by the locals. A matter of verifiable history.

I made no statement to either effect. My point was that the atheists are perfectly willing to believe what someone today tells them about what was allegedly seen through a super-duper telescope and enhanced by a super-duper computer; and then believe the theory which they say explains what the computer produced. But they dismiss eyewitness accounts of the resurrection. Intellectual snobbery at its finest.

Which biblical author personally witnessed the resurrection of Jesus? Be aware that I already know the answer to this question.

Are you asking who saw the actual moment of the resurrection? Or who saw Jesus after the resurrection?

The resurrection.

Are you asking who saw the actual moment of the resurrection? Or who saw Jesus after the resurrection?

Interesting info below....

Alex Vostox, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia, 5 years ago

If anyone ask "Why carrying the Communist corpse or chopping their head?" That answer is for intelligence purpose. The Malayan Communist Party member mainly consisted of local Chinese (They assume the situation of Communist China victory against Kuomintang can be copying in Malaya) and got ties with triads / secret society. Any intelligence collected by troops on the ground is important for Malayan Special Branch and Army Intelligence. The practice of chopping the communist terrorist head also for the same reason. You don't wan't to carrying a heavy decaying corpse through humid forest and unpredictable Malaya weather, sapping all your energy as you walking out the OP area. At least head is much lighter than whole body. And "Why not just photograph the bodies instead?" The problem is the film cameras at that time cannot handled the rough Malayan weather and environment. Most of the picture above were taken in area closer than deep jungle. Allowed them to be 'saved' much faster.

Again, what author of the Bible saw the actual resurrection. You said people like myself don't believe eyewitness accounts. Stories told by people are often wildly inaccurate or greatly enhanced especially as they are retold over the years. But in this case nothing in the Bible is even being written by a person who was actually there. They are just regurgitating a story they heard. Gee that can't be wrong huh?

Ugh!

What you fail to understand is: I no more need to know the actual origin of the Universe than you need to know the origin of God.

I know the Universe exists. I know that it has been running on autopilot for several billion years.

I know there are some interesting theories as to how the Universe might have originated. They are just that, intetesting theories.

Why did you refuse to clarify your question?

Actual authors of the Bible saw Jesus after the resurrection. If I see someone alive after I've seen them dead, that's good evidence that a resurrection occurred, even if I wasn't there at the moment it happened. If you see me on the street, you can be quite sure I was born, even though you weren't in the delivery room.

Look, I understand that bringing someone back to life after they've been brutally murdered is extraordinary and hard to believe. And things that happened 2,000 years ago become dim to some people. Heck, there is more recent history than the resurrection that people deny having happened. Would you believe if God had done something ordinary, that any mere human could explain or duplicate? It seems that either way, there are going to be those who will not believe. Been that way forever, so far.

word

Both Word and word 😜

No, they did not. The Gospels of the New Testament were written by Greek Christians, in Greek, more than 70 years after Jesus died. Dr. Bart Ehrman, a noted New Testament historian and scholar, explains this in the following video.



His videos are very interesting.

FWIW.

L.W.

This is interesting....

Of a different note, my research shows that the first one to see Jesus after His resurrection was Mary Magdalene, just as it says (Mark 16:9). Then the others saw Him afterward.

Sheesh... Matthew was a disciple, Mark was a disciple, John was a disciple and wrote 5 books of the NT. 3 of the 4 Gospels was written by these men. Peter was a disciple, James was his half brother. Jude may have been a disciple or a half brother as well. Paul who wrote the rest of the NT certainly had a powerful encounter with Jesus after his resurrection. 500 people witnessed Christ being alive after His resurrection.

Bart Ehrman is a wolf in sheep's clothing. His statements do not line up with the Bible.

Isn’t he a secularist?

Don't have time to look at that right now, will try to do so later. Someone with more detailed knowledge than I may have something to say about it in the meantime. I'll just say that while we may only have later manuscripts to go by, that doesn't mean that the words don't belong to who they are attributed to. Lots of books have been translated into languages other than that in which they were originally penned, the translation being done by someone other than the original author. The copy of The Gulag Archipelago I read was, I believe, printed, in English, after the death of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who wrote it in Russian. I don't know if an original manuscript signed by Solzhenitsyn exists; even if it did, who can say it was he who signed it? I still consider Solzhenitsyn to be the author. If you want to doubt or disbelieve, you can find reasons to do so.

Some books of the Bible were written by someone other than the author, like celebrities today have ghost writers for their autobiographies. Paul for instance, when he was in prison. Doesn't mean Paul didn't control the contents, just means he didn't press pen to paper for everything attributed to him.

Until the second coming, I doubt that there will ever be absolute proof of Jesus resurrection nor His virgin birth. I believe that this is God’s intent. It will always be a matter of a personal decision - what do you choose to believe? It requires faith. Faith cannot be self produced; it is a gift from God.

Similarly, how does anyone know that their spouse truly loves them? It is a decision to believe that the spouse is giving love with pure, unselfish, sacrificial intent. There is no proof. Only interpretation of personal experience.

Even though it is Jesus’ desire that everyone be saved, many will choose not to believe. If we were to apply the parable of the four souls, only 1 out of 4 people who hear the gospel will truly believe.

There is a bigger question: what does it mean to believe in Jesus? It is more than intellectual belief. The gospels tell of demons acknowledging that Jesus was the Son of God and knew of His purpose and plan. For me, it took decades to realize that “belief” means that I believe in the Bible so much that I try to live my life according to its message.

That's right but only because of his eyesight which he states at the end of one of his books.

Here's something to keep in mind regarding this discussion: Jesus’ most devout first century followers never owned the Bible, never read the Bible, likely couldn’t have read the Bible if there was the Bible because most of em’ likely couldn’t read and there was no ‘the Bible’ to read. But these devout first century followers of Jesus turned the world upside down and they’re the reason that there are Christians worshipping Jesus today. And they never held the Bible because there was no ‘the Bible’ until the fourth century. So what happened…? What did they believe…? What did they know that many nowadays don’t know…? Why is it that people nowadays are so quick to walk away and/or deny the faith of Christianity because of a book that didn’t even exist when Christianity first began…?

Just curious how you came to that conclusion that His followers couldn't read? The OT had been completed for a centuries. The disciples at the very least were very familiar with the OT and often quoted it as well as secular books. Luke was a physician and Mathew was a tax collector, they both had to know how to read and write to do their jobs. John was told "to write these things down" in Revelation.
True that they did turn the world upside down but not because of their own efforts but because of the pre-determined plan of God.

You think literacy was widespread in Judea in the first century among common people who struggled on a daily basis just to survive…?

Because there is too much Bible Thumping. Is that the what you want to hear?

Like everything in life, there must be a balance. Obviously one can't thump the Bible but walk depart from it and expect their ministry to be effective. But neither should one depart from scripture. How wayward man would soon be.

If early Christians were literate and had access to the Bible, would they have used it? And if so, would they have been as effective? Would God's plan still have played out according to his design? Or would the Bible have screwed everything up?

Many people…maybe most people…were raised on a version of the Christian faith that relied on the Bible as the foundation of the Christian faith ~ a version that many people…maybe most people…see as having been dismantled by academia and/or the realities of life. The faith of Jesus’ most devoted first century followers relied on the event of the resurrection of Jesus as its foundation ~ as they all made crystal clear in the historical documents that they wrote. Maybe people nowadays should consider ‘that’ version as well. If people give up on the faith of Christianity because of something about or in the Bible, maybe they’re giving up on it unnecessarily.

John 3:16

Word

So you still believe the Gospels were written by the person whose name they bear. I got some sad news for ya.

With the Bible ,or not with your own interpretation of such?


Even devout theologians of scholarly background don't attribute
the synoptic gospels to being written by disciples.

I don't disagree with any of this, but need to clarify that because people BELIEVE the Bible has been dismantled by academia and/or the realities of life doesn't mean that it has been. Also, Biblical truths can be, and are, troubling, often requiring years of prayer, if not a lifetime, to work through. If one gives up after much prayer and consideration, well thats between them and the Father. In no case do I believe Truths are negotiable.

We should not expect Christianity to be an easy sell. Early Christians, without a Bible, obviously knew this too. What happened to Jesus and all but one of the Disciples? Try to sell that. I agree whole heartly that focus should be on the resurrection and the new birth.

Also, Christians will never be in the majority. In Jesus' first documented Sermon, the Sermon on the Mount, he made this scary clear. Therefore, if Christians ever appear to be in the majority, know that its in appearance alone. We are being deceived.

I wonder if Mary Magdalene may have in fact been Jesus' wife. I don't think you could be a Jewish Rabbi in that day and time if you were not married. She certainly was close to Jesus and her marital status could have easily been edited out.

There are Arabic versions of scripture that avow that Jesus was born with a twin. Maybe Thomas? He was someone's twin.

Yep, I believe that. Matthew was a tax collector and was chosen by Jesus as one of the twelve disciples. Mark was a frequent companion with Peter during the formation of the early church after Christ's resurrection. Luke was a doctor and was a frequent companion with Paul whose main task was to bring the gospel to the Gentiles. And John was "the disciple Jesus loved" describes the purpose of his magnificent gospel thusly:

The disciples saw Jesus do many other miraculous signs in addition to the ones recorded in this book. But these are written so that you may continue to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in Him you will have life by the power of His name.

And this:

This disciple is the one who testifies to these events and has recorded them here. And we know that his account of the things is accurate.

So yep, I believe the Bible. I believe when John says he was the author, he was the author. Someone, cooks up some story on why these early believers weren't the authors, doesn't mean squat to me or any other bible believing Christian.

God bless you all, may those who believe grow stronger in your faith, and may those who don't please listen.

Acts 9 indicates Paul saw no resurrected Jesus..He was struck blind..
nor did his travel companions see any bodily Jesus.

As for the alleged '500' we have no first hand testimony from them.

I don't know about you. but if someone said they had a bunch
of witnesses that saw me do something, the law would require
their personal testimonies and right to cross- examination.

It's hard enough to sort fact from fiction in current events, yet alone two thousand years ago.

Who recorded the words of Jesus from the Mount?
..and who recorded the conversation of Jesus with
Satan in the desert?


The other issue is that believers don't apply the
Evidentiary Scale to their claims like we do with
other claims outside of theology.

Try and claim you have 500 actual living witnesses to
Bigfoot and see if Xtians will then believe in Bigfoot.

He WAS someone’s twin?

Or are these “Arabic versions” as worthy of skepticism as the other ancient texts your presuppositions justify deconstructing?

I think Peter and John both wrote first hand testimony as well as Paul. John in his gospel as mentioned previously, and Peter in his second epistle.ch 1:16-19. Paul (or Saul as he was known at the time) was blinded by a bright light and heard a voice who identified Himself as: "I am Jesus, the one whom you are persecuting". So to say, he didn't see Him, may be technically correct, but to say he didn't meet Him would be false. Starman, I will pray for you, whether you want me to or not.

Good question....according to Birger A. Pearson, novelists and screenwriters try to insert something salacious into the life of Jesus, they focus on one woman: Mary from Magdala. Was Mary Magdalene a prostitute? Was Mary Magdalene the wife of Jesus?

Pearson sets forth in “From Saint to Sinner” a noncanonical Gospel of Mary, enhances her role to a greater proportion. Her ongoing role in the early church is subject to speculation, but she is indeed getting more respect in theological circles, not for being Mary Magdalene wife of Jesus nor for being Mary Magdalene a prostitute, but for being a faithful follower of her Rabboni—her teacher.

When novelists and screenwriters try to insert something salacious into the life of Jesus, they focus on one woman: Mary from Magdala. Was Mary Magdalene a prostitute? Was Mary Magdalene the wife of Jesus?

Only the Western church has said that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. The Eastern church has always honored her as an apostle, noting her as the “apostle to the apostles,” based on the account of the Gospel of John which has Jesus calling her by name and telling her to give the news of his resurrection to the other disciples.

Pearson notes, there’s no substantial evidence for either of these theories. As for her being named in the New Testament, none of the Gospels hints of her as being Mary Magdalene, wife of Jesus. Three Gospels name her only as a witness of his crucifixion and/or burial. All four Gospels place her at the scene of Jesus’ resurrection (though Luke does not list her as a witness). Only in the Gospel according to Luke is there even the slightest implication that she might have had a past life that could raise eyebrows and the question: Was Mary Magdalene a prostitute? Luke 8 names her among other female followers and financial supporters, and says that she had been released from the power of seven demons.

So for me, it is hard to say.

THOMAS was someone's twin. His names denote that. Didymos and Thomas translate to twin.

Dudes, it is interesting the difference in our motivations when we are discussing these type of things. We (Christians) only care about your eternal soul, and we'd like nothing more than for the Holy Spirit to shine His light on you, so you can see and understand the truth, and come to know the One True God. I'll leave it at that. These responses are strangely consistent from the Christian brothers on this forum.

It's hard for me to say also. The Christian church has stitched on so much that doesn't make sense. I think Thomas Jefferson was right to try to ferret out the actual teachings of Jesus and combine them into his Jefferson Bible.

Agreed

I apologize I misunderstood

Jefferson basically threw the miracle claims
in the bin and remained a Deist.

Some may be surprised How many Founding Fathers
were Deist, not Theist —A philosophy where human
reason rather than reliance on an interventional god
as a means of solving problems.

Is this what you are referring to?

The burden of proof determines which party is responsible for putting forth evidence and the level of evidence they must provide in order to prevail. In most cases, the plaintiff (the party bringing the claim) has the burden of proof. As an initial matter, they must meet the burden of production. This requires the plaintiff to put forth evidence in the form of witness testimony, documents, or objects. After the plaintiff presents his or her case-in-chief, the burden of production shifts to the defendant, who then has the opportunity to provide evidence either rebutting the plaintiff’s evidence or supporting the defendant’s own arguments.

Don't ask Christians for proof....the is none....but we have lotsa evidence.

Where does such evidence plot on the
Evidentiary Scale?

Even the claim of having evidence for miraculous events is questionable. Being written is not evidence.

Again,

Is this what you are referring to?

The burden of proof determines which party is responsible for putting forth evidence and the level of evidence they must provide in order to prevail. In most cases, the plaintiff (the party bringing the claim) has the burden of proof. As an initial matter, they must meet the burden of production. This requires the plaintiff to put forth evidence in the form of witness testimony, documents, or objects. After the plaintiff presents his or her case-in-chief, the burden of production shifts to the defendant, who then has the opportunity to provide evidence either rebutting the plaintiff’s evidence or supporting the defendant’s own arguments.

No, that is not the evidentiary scale. Submissions of evidence are graded
according to the evidentiary scale. Evidence can be considered inadequate
by a judge If it don't meet the required minimum.

You got me...I'm lost in what you are referring to.

You need to educate yourself about the science and what constitutes facts and evidence. Faith is not a suitable substitute for the truth.

There are no eyewitness accounts of the alledged resurrection anyway - you're making crap up.

If a person were actually able to know a real "truth", faith would not need to be a suitable substitute for that. Then again, an individual's concept or notion of the truth will never be an adequate substitute for faith.

You're a double vaxxed covtard.

You "followed the science".

You thought you knew the "facts" and "evidence".

You had "faith" in government propaganda.

And it was a complete hoax.

It was an obvious hoax.

And you fell for it.

You've no business questioning anyone else's reasoning, when yours is so defective.

William Albright PhD archeologist disagrees strongly. He wrote the entire New Testament was written before the year 70AD. He said It was written by Jews. He was NOT a Christian!

He is wrong. The reasons why are readily available.

I am on the verge of converting to Judaism as is my son. He actually regularly attends meetings at a Jewish house of worship down around New Orleans where he lives.

The miracle of Jewish survival and the rebirth of Israel is hard to ignore.

As prophesied they have returned to their land and have become a world superpower both financially and militarily.

I have come to believe Jesus invited the rest of the world into Judaism. He clearly said he came to the lost sheep of Israel.

My DNA test shows a small amount of Jewish ancestry although as I understand that is not necessary for conversion.

Believing in something that you don't know to be true is just attempting to fill in the gaps in the falsehood of pretending to know. An appropriate honest answer for the gaps would be we don't know. The more we know the more the gods dissappear into the folklore.

Faith is a usefull excuse for commiting attrocities and/or making a buck or two.

Scientists don't go around killing people because they don't believe in science.

How so?

Yet orthodox Judaism rejects Jesus as their prophesied Messiah.

Ever hear of abortion?

If you convert to Judaism will you apologize to the Baptist church that you are a leader of? Will you finally stop calling yourself a Christian?

How does one practice Judaism without a temple in which to make sacrifices?

Probably not, I believe Jesus is who he said he is.

Which question(s) were you answering there?

Are you saying you’re a Christian even if converting to Judaism?

LOL, I see that you are still auditioning to be the next Biden press secretary. You sound just like our Democrats, making disjointed declarations and accusations that use all the buzz words, without anything to back it up. I am sincerely sorry for whatever caused the bitterness that you have toward Christians and our faith, because your vitriol towards us goes far beyond mere disagreement; it seems indicative of some deep-seated trauma in your past. Otherwise, why continue to lash out every time one of these threads appear? The OP posed the question of why Christianity seems to be declining. You could just state your belief that the decline is because people are realizing that it is a hoax, then leave the rest of us to civilly discuss other causes. But no, you have this strange compulsion to continue to attack Christianity as long as the thread is active. It's odd, because I doubt this much venom would be coming from you on any other subject; even if someone's screen name was pushfeedand7mm, I doubt that your hair would be set on fire like it is on this subject.

We've done this dance before and I see no need to further engage someone with your, frankly, unhinged mentality. My post and response were directed towards Hastings, not you.

Well now, Christianity is a sect of Judaism. Jesus was a Jew as were most of the early Christians. He was pretty clear that he did not come to abolish the law and the prophets and he was also very clear that he came to the lost sheep of Israel. GOD was very clear that the covenant with the Jews is everlasting. Christianity nowadays and for the last many hundred years has left Jesus out except for his name. So, yes I can believe in and follow Jesus' teachings and convert to Judaism. I am studying it and considering it.

How many books of the Bible do you actually accept? Hadn’t you discounted all except a handful?


If keeping the law according to historical Judaism is the route you choose to take is think that it would be imperative that you clear your conscience concerning the Baptist church and your dealings with those people.

Deceiving them by influencing them down a path that you know is contrary to their beliefs breaks several of the commandments upon which you claim place so much importance.

If they’re the same why is conversion necessary?

Why did Jews like the Pharisee Saul chase down, imprison, and execute Christians?

Why did the Jews shout in support of the Romans crucifying Jesus?

How does one practice Judaism without a temple in which to offer sacrifices?

I’d say that he isn’t serious but is just throwing things against the wall. Call it womanly intuition.

How can he be breaking commandments by enlightening people and helping them to learn the errors of their ways?

Now wait a minuet. If you want to go by what Jesus said read the whole verse. Jesus didn't come to abolish the law "but to fulfill it". What that means is that everything that the law did is finished in him. Believe what you want but don't join anything unless you can believe the teachings as they stand.

To me, Jesus clearly promoted His new movement by launching the New Covenant that Jeremiah predicted in the Law and the Prophets. And His new command “to love other’s as I have loved you” was to serve as the all-encompassing ethic of His new movement. And the launching of this New Covenant carried implications for the old covenant, which clearly had a shelf life. The author of Hebrews said the old covenant became outdated and obsolete because a new and better one replaced it.

Makes no sense to me for someone who professes to be a follower of Jesus to put any of their faith in a covenant that the New Testament clearly says has already served its purpose. Paul ‘had’ been an exemplary old covenant law keeper and rule follower who…after he became a true follower of Jesus, understood better than anyone the stark contrast between what had come before, and the kingdom that Jesus said He came to introduce…and he criticized Jesus’ followers who kept hangin’ on to old covenant ways of relating to God, ways that God Himself said that He was sick and tired of.

By design, the old covenant led to the newer one. Jesus said He came to fulfill God’s promises to Israel in the old covenant and that it would disappear when everything in it was accomplished. And it did, in fact, disappear on August 6 in 70 AD when the Roman Legion completely destroyed the Jewish Temple, and the old covenant was never officially practiced again because it became impossible to do so.

The conditional and temporary old covenant that God made with the Ancient Israelites…and ‘only’ with the Ancient Israelites…is NOT the unconditional and everlasting covenant that God made with Abraham.

I’m certain that you can figure out the conflict.

interesting!

Have you delved into Zoroastrianism at all?

I think they were the initial monotheists? and preceded Judaism by a few years.

After Jesus was crucified, religious Israel wrestled for the next 40 years with the internal tension created by Jesus’ New Covenant. The Judaizers tried hard to stamp it out, but it kept growing. Due to the tireless efforts of Apostle Peter and Apostle Paul…and James (Jesus’ own brother) and others, Jews throughout the Roman Empire began abandoning their strict adherence to the old covenant and started truly following the resurrected Jesus.

Then the transition came to a quick end, on August 6th in AD 70. The four-year war between Rome and the Jewish rebels came to a violent conclusion. The Jewish Temple…the very heart of ancient Judaism…was looted and burned and razed to the ground. Its destruction signaled the end of ancient Judaism. The words of the old covenant were preserved, but Israel’s ability to live in accordance with those words disappeared in a single day.

Ancient Judaism...as prescribed by Moses at Mount Sinai...ceased to exist. To use Jesus’ term, it “disappeared.”

And again, the conditional and temporary old covenant that God made with the Ancient Israelites…and ‘only’ with the Ancient Israelites…is NOT the unconditional and everlasting covenant that God made with Abraham.

I have read a bit on Zoroastrianism. Pretty obvious there was a strong connection between them and Judaism. And Zoroastrian priests/wise men somehow were informed of Jesus birth and made a very difficult trip over very rugged terrain to see him for themselves. There is so much we don't know.

Kinda like “I’m gonna order a copy of TJ’s Bible” tossed out there into every Christian conversation for about a year?

So, just who is "we"? Do you have a lizard in your pocket?

If ever you experience an important awakening and realize that you simply do not have the power and ability to read the minds or the intent of others, you will probably be in a complete dither. Again and again you pretend that you can perform such a miracle, and then try to build your case on the false premise. That is as baseless and intellectually dishonest as a person can be. Ergo, your posts are devoid of importance. Such vacuous rigidity and obstinate behavior must feel like a curse.

And, you might think about some work on your spelling.

Definitely. I can’t remember how many books that we figured Hastings ascribes to but it seems to have been only a hand full.

Frankly, I don’t think that he’s serious but more likely throwing things against the wall for effect.

What is involved - what are the procedures - in your process of converting to Judaism?

There were 613 rules and regulations in the old covenant. For someone to assert that the old covenant is still in effect and that they abide by it by not eating pork or shrimp or catfish, and that they keep the sabbath…while completely ignoring all of the other 611 rules and regulations in the old covenant…seems more than a bit disingenuous and hypocritical. The New Testament documents made it very clear to the Judaizers that you’re either ‘all in’ regarding the old covenant, or you’re not in it ‘at all’.

What is a miacle?

Kinda like a lihtning bolt. Thx !

No more conflict than any other who may proselytize.

I think the "we" was referenced in the opening post.
As in "we who are abandoning Chritianity en masse"

So if you were part of a private club, and some jackass, came in trying to change the club and make it something totally different than what you signed up for you’d be OK with that?

This post appears to have been directed at me, but I’m not sure which of my posts it’s responding to?

No man alive (sans Yeshua) could keep the law .
The whole Old Testament is full of Israelites that failed time and again. Just like everyone of us. When Jesus came , he made it clear, not only could we not keep the law but we never even understood the law...
On the cross Yeshua said “it is finished.”
Post the cross we are under grace .

Blessed be the Lord our GOD.

Antlers, how do you define sin? Where should one go for reference? When Jesus spoke of Sin, what was he referring to?

Sorry man, I was responding to several of your earlier pointed and direct posts and questions to another individual regarding Judaism, but my response wasn’t directed at you.

Yes Sir.
If you can understand the NT, you will see that the law was only given to show them that they couldn't be good enough and would have to rely on the sacrifice rather than their own ability, thus making the way for them to rely on the perfect sacrifice of Jesus.

Thanks for the reply, but seems not the case. The "we" I noted was used by mauserand9mm, and not in the context of abandonment of a church or denomination by a Christian.

It was stated thusly: "The more we know the more the gods dissappear into the folklore."

I think that ‘sin’ is intentionally doing something that you inherently know to be wrong. Do ‘you’ need a “reference” to tell you that the intentionally wrong thing that you’re doing is ‘wrong’…?I think that He was referring to one intentionally doing something that one inherently knows to be wrong.

Sounds like man doing "what's right in his own eyes" and we're specifically cautioned against this.

Jesus would have referred back to His Father’s law which He came to fulfill because we couldn’t.

He didn’t delete the law He fulfilled it for those who look to Him in faith. Those who don’t believe that He came to do that are placing their faith in themselves to fulfill it on their own behalf.

No reason to have a list of this or that sin or which is worse. The whole point of salvation is to be rid of a sin consciousness. Christian philosophy tells you that you aren't getting to heaven based on not sinning. Trust in your savior. Trust the sacrifice and not your ability and focus attention on the things that bring love, joy, peace, goodness, gentleness meekness, and longsuffering and there will be no need to worry about sin.

Don't know exactly what you mean by that. What does it mean when a contract is fulfilled? What would I mean if I said to you," I didn't come here to tear up your contract, I came to fulfill it." It would mean that the contract was finished and paid in full.

I absolutely and unequivocally believe that God loves us and forgives us and saves us...not because of who we are or because of anything we do (such as ‘not’ sinning)…but because of what Jesus did on the cross. Our best efforts would never be good enough to ‘earn’ salvation. We are not saved by obeying a list of do’s and don’t’s, rules and regulations, or by ‘not’ sinning…but by God’s grace alone...through faith in Jesus...and not at all by our own efforts (such as ‘not’ sinning) or works.

Antlers, you believe an individual is his own moral compass, or as Oprah would say, an individual is their own God. I must admit to being very disappointed in hearing you say that.

That's the we I referenced

Clarification, the God of Christians is one of many gods known, or invented, or worshiped (your choice) by mankind through the millenia.

I would be okay with any member who wanted to follow "jackass" to his new club.

Is that not what proselytizing is all about? Pulling folks away from their club, to yours, so you can charge them dues.

Where does scripture say Saul actually killed Xtians?

I've never found the scripture detailing such and
Prof. Bart Ehrman is on record saying the same.


But Different fathers apparently.

I believe that every human being has a conscience which has been placed there by God Himself. Christian scripture also teaches that. There is a sense of right and wrong that we all have. I believe that God put a conscience within each of us ~ a sense of right and wrong. And even those who have never even heard of Christian scripture still know the difference.

I would say they when someone is saved, they get a new compass. They don't need to study all the rules because the ruler will guide them.

Why do you think he was on the way to Damascus to have them arrested. Scripture also records him at Steven's stoning.

My understanding of the reconciliation made through the cross is that Christ’s active obedience in leading a perfect life & His passive obedience in dying fulfilled the law’s demands for those who look to Him and His work in faith. Hence I qualified fulfillment based upon a man’s faith.

Is that not your understanding? Is it your understanding that fulfillment came between Him & mankind as a whole rather than individuals? Is that what you’re getting at?

Yes, but we also have concupiscence and ignorance.

1./ "arrested" doesnt mean killed.
2./ Does scripture describe Saul actively
throwing stones at Steven?

"Recently in Iraq, 19 Yazidi girls were placed in iron cages and burned alive in front of a crowd of hundreds, for refusing to copulate with jihadis."

"Religious minority women under IS [Islamic State] control are often repeatedly sold from jihadi to jihadi. Once militants get tired of raping and abusing one particular girl, they usually sell them off to one of their militant buddies so they can rape and abuse them at their own pleasure."

"After their children were abducted by the Islamic State, a couple answered their door to find the body parts of their daughters and a video of them being tortured and raped."

"Christian girls are considered goods to be damaged at leisure. Abusing them is a right. According to the community's mentality it is not even a crime. Muslims regard them as spoils of war."

Radical Islams' conscience tells them this okay.

Hitler did all his damage with the Church as the main weapon. Most Germans believed what they were doing was morally right.

I believe you are correct....

According to Dr John Oaks, he says..... "The Bible does not say that Paul himself actually killed any Christians. It does say in Acts 7:58 that he was present at the stoning of Stephen and that he approved this act. Whether he actually threw one of the stones is not stated one way or another. It is certainly possible that he actually threw one of the stones, in which case he would have killed a Christian. However, one gets the sense that Paul was a very high level leader of the Jews and an important Pharisee, despite the fact that he was relatively young. Such a person normally will not get their hands dirty by actually performing an execution. Therefore, if I were to guess (and it would be just a guess), I would imagine that he never actually did the physical act of killing a Christian. However, he oversaw such arrests and executions. He confesses this in his own writings. He tells us in Acts 22:4-5 that he persecuted Christians and saw to their arrest and punishment. In Acts 9:1 we hear that Paul was making “murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples.” As far as Paul was concerned, he felt that he was responsible for the killing of Christians. He felt that he was “the worst of sinners” 1 Tim 1:15. I assume that he was correct in his analysis of the situation–that he was responsible for the deaths of some believers. However, in my opinion, it is more likely than not that his responsibility was as one overseeing or encouraging such killings, not actually physically carrying them out."

Talk is cheap.

For example, when Solomon admonished someone who had wronged King David, he said to them “You know in your heart all of the wrong that you did to my father David.”

We are on the same page.

I honestly think however it's a bit broader than that. Imagine someone just trusting in the God they can't see and possibly never even heard of. Based on Jesus being the Lamb slain before the foundation of the earth, God and Jesus being one, and Abraham's and all the Profits and righteous people who died before Jesus, I think the faith part is more important than knowing the complete story and the names of all the players.

He may not have done the deed himself, but I figure there is enough evidence to convict him in a murder case. Doesn't matter in the least however since sin is of the heart and not necessarily in the act and he was saved afterward anyway.

A person can clearly know in their heart something that is also written down on a tablet (as it were). There are internal and external witnesses.

Scripture says that the moral law is written upon all our hearts so that no one is without excuse. What was the excuse? That a person had not seen the written form of the law.

You have gathered enough evidence from vague scripture
to make a murder wrap stick?..LoL...😂

Yea I suppose, but if you and I go somewhere to kill somebody even if I'm the only one to throw a rock, you will still go down for it right alongside me.

That would be "rap", not "wrap". Just in case you wanted to sound smart.

Christianity on the Campfire...

Don't get too close to the coals.

You need to prove "intent" to convict Saul.
and meet the required std of evidence.
And you are relying on vague questionable
details from antiquity from an anonymous
author.
No judge would entertain your foolishness.

Why debate scripture with a guy who doesn’t believe in it?

Something cannot be deemed true just because it is written in old scrolls.

Something is not necessarily true because people believe it to be true.

A certain standard of evidence is needed to prove a proposition.

Just that it is written and believed does not necessarily make it so.

Clark is debating modern criminal law according
to his faith in the scripture ..a sure recipe for disaster.

I'm not arguing with you about it anymore. Like I said it's a moot point. They did however lay their garments at Paul's feet when they stoned Stephen. At that time Paul was in line to become the next high priest. It is reasonable that he condoned the stoning or perhaps ordered it since he was the one charged to arrest Christians.

Good , coz You don't have anything of substance
that would stand in a modern judicial system
when trying to convict for murder.

When I used the term “we” I meant those that share the same rational, logical and skeptical thought process – there’s lots of us out there. You appear to not want to be accused as being part of that group.

Provide proof that a scientist has performed, or arranged, an abortion because the fetus didn’t believe in science.

That’s a typical response when the believer is confronted with the harsh realities of the failures of their belief system and they become desperately defensive, aggressive and divisive.

hint...

What do you mean by the idiom?

If someone simply just doesn’t believe in the faith of Christianity to begin with, that’s one thing. But in our post-Christian society…for those who’ve walked away from it, or for those who no longer find it attractive, or for those who have come to no longer believe in it…those are the reasons that the OP was pertaining to. For those who once embraced it, who no longer embrace it, why is that…?

And there you have it, in a nutshell.

Ed

IIRC ,James required Jesus followers to be Torah
compliant as prerequisite and had a falling out
with Paul over it.
James led the Jerusalem church for some 30 yrs
didn't he?


Rabbis explain how Jesus doesnt fit the criteria
for the Messiah, they break it down so even you
could understand it.

The jackass, agreed to the rules of the club, went through the initiation and was accepted as a member in agreement. He then went wacko jacko and started trying to change the club. That’s not proselytizing. That’s deception and lying. I doubt your conclusion.

Perhaps they begin to question. Which is a good thing.

My point is, there's no reason to place the "Judeo" in front of "Christian".

The term "Christian" covers it all.

The reported words of Jesus have him supporting Judaism, and the reason why he was sent...

I don’t disagree. But clearly there are ‘still’ some Judaizers out there.

Jesus Himself said “Until John the Baptist, the Law and the Prophets ‘was’ your guide. But now the good news (the Gospel) of the kingdom of God is being preached…”.

Jesus was a Jew.

I used to listen to, the Christian Jew Hour.

If Jesus was really divine then big sky daddy
sent the wrong dude. coz the Hebrew Messiah
(as prophecied) is meant to be a mere mortal,
nothing more.

You are describing the one Jefferson said was the first to corrupt the doctrines of Jesus.

Then I’m describing you and only describing him by accident.

Wacko jacko?
Maybe, he had an epiphany!

If he is a Muslim, or Hindu discovering Christianity, is he wacko jacko?

I think the question then would be: Should he leave his Muslim or Hindu church and not pretend to be something he's not? Especially if he were in a leadership role.

The latter would describe me.

I spent every Sabbath in Church as a kid. Learned all the Sabbath School lessons. Took Bible studies with missionaries from two different Churches. Studied OT in College.

I even remember praying once at ten years of age when I lost a brand new pocket knife in a tall alfalfa field.

But as I matured and learned the actual mechanics of the world, I came to recognize all of religion to be myths written by very clever and learned men with the intent to control and tax their tribes.

It is all about keeping the priest well fed, well laid, and safe guard his monopoly on power.

And yes, the priests so jealously guarded their power structure that a few short centuries ago, I would have been burned at the stake for expressing such thoughts.

What do most of us say today about governing bodies trying to suppress voices of opposition?

I think there are a great many people (like you) who once embraced it, who no longer embrace it. But of ‘all’ of the reasons that you gave for no longer embracing it, NONE of those reasons have anything to do with Jesus or His teachings. And that’s my point: Of all of the people that I’ve talked to, listened to, and read their interviews and blogs and books…and there have been many dozens of them (like you) who once embraced it, but who no longer embrace it…I’ve yet to hear a story from anyone who abandoned the faith of Christianity based on anything directly related to Jesus or His teachings. I’ve yet to hear a story from anyone who abandoned the faith of Christianity based on anything directly related to the faith of Christianity ~ at least the original version anyway.

Do you believe in reproof and rebuke of sin? If so, who or what is the authority?






Are Christians immune from deception? How is one to test the spirits?






Again, are Christians immune from deception? Is safe to say Satan is the master of deception?





.

I believe that our conscience, this inner moral compass that God Himself placed within each of us…that scripture also affirms…ought to always point us to right and wrong. But, because we live in a broken world (because of sin in the world), this innate and God-given moral compass within each of us can sometimes become suppressed and dulled, for a variety of reasons; we can also intentionally ignore it, just as we can intentionally ignore the moral teachings in scripture.

I’m a lot more mindful of trusting in Jesus for my salvation than I am with me not sinning. Despite my best efforts, I’m gonna continue to sin, as are you. I strive to stay focused on trusting in Jesus…first and foremost, regardless of anything else, no matter what…as opposed to me focusing on my ability to not sin.

Antlers, I do not believe you answered the question.

I think I’ve made my beliefs quite clear. Maybe I can expound a bit; can you rephrase the above question…?

Nor did you answer this question which was specifically asked of ‘you’ a couple of pages ago:

.
No, I absolutely have no problems with Christ's teachings. I recognise Christ as one of history's top philosophers.

I simply do not recognise Christ as supernatural.

Did you ‘ever’ recognize Christ as supernatural…?

Not after I was of "the age of consent".

IOW, old enough for babtism.

I'd say that very little is known about the man, Yeshua/Jesus, the charismatic rabbi.

Example. A pastor at a church is openly sleeping around, with multiple partners, and has no remorse or intentions of stopping.

Do you believe the church is to rebuke the pastor, and if so, on what authority?

Absolutely I need reference. My heart and human mind will start making very poor rationalizations. The Word is my guide.

It's so simple men.

I suppose if that particular church is set up such that the elders or deacons, or the congregation itself, has a say-so regarding the pastor’s employment agreement…and if that pastor violates that employment agreement…then the elders or deacons, or the congregation itself can take whatever actions they feel is necessary ~ from a rebuke up to and including termination.

Agreed. How do you reconcile this rebuke if the pastor is to determine sin based on his own heart compass?

You are so right. Jesus taught for three whole years and his words are simple and easy to understand. His teaching and doctrine was nothing new.

The common people loved him and followed him. A sizable part of the Jewish hierarchy were alarmed and had him killed with the very reluctant OK of the Roman governor.

Where the problem is with ''Christianity'' is that it was hijacked and things were imputed to Jesus that he never taught.

A violation of his employment agreement is a violation of his employment agreement. Period. In this particular hypothetical situation, the pastor is clearly ignoring the teachings of scripture just as he is ignoring his God-given moral compass.

Some want it to be simple, even when it's not. The bottom line is simple: an absence of evidence to support supernatural claims, people being raised from the dead, the existence of a cosmic monarch, etc....

Satan misleads people and makes them believe their own righteousness. One reason we need the Bible is to test spirits - to determine if what they tell us is true or false.

On your own efforts, that is correct. You will continue to sin. However, allowing Christ to change us, to do the heavy lifting through grace, will change us for the better. Grace is a free gift, but you have to go get it. It's not handed to you.

Apostle Paul…whom the Lord clearly said was His chosen instrument to proclaim His name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel…was pretty honest about his ongoing struggle with sin.

Supernatural? The event was recorded in the book of Matthew chapter 14....specifically Matthew 14:22-33

Antlers, these two post seem to contradict one another but I could be missing something.

You defined sin as intentionally doing something that one inherently knows is wrong. You said nothing of scripture. Then when asked for a reference for sin, you doubled down on your position and responded with a question, should we need a reference, which still ignored scripture. Then you say the pastor is clearly ignoring scripture. No where in your definition of sin was scripture mentioned. You also say the pastor is ignoring his moral compass? We certainly have no insight into the mans mind and his personal dealings with God.

I don’t know how I could be any more clear regarding my take on this particular subject matter and discussion between you and I. My apologetic regarding the faith of Christianity is clearly different than yours, and I’m OK with that.

But our theological differences in no wise diminish the Gospel.

His ministry is estimated at up to 3 yrs
Some scholars argue much less.

The NT depiction of Pontius Pilate is at odds with
Roman imperial records of antiquity.
Professors of Roman studies Cambridge, will tell
you this..two such are Mary Beard and Andrew Hadrill.

An account in Matthew by an anonymous author
who does not claim to witness such. So effectively
an extraordinary story with underwhelming evidence.
On the evidentiary scale it don't add up to squat.

Julius Caesar wrote that it's possible the GODS
favored him , after all he won so many battles often
against the odds..is that a credible claim in your
mind?

"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus,
by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will
be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the
brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason
and freedom of thought in these United States will do away
all this artificial scaffolding..".

{Jefferson letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823}

I witnessed, on television, David Copperfield make a Boing 747 disappear into thin air.

I have seen Justin Willman float in midair.

The world witnessed Joe Biden get elected as POTUS in 2020.

The nation watched as a single deranged gunman killed JFK.

And then as another killed RFK.

I am a bit skeptical that any of these events actually happened as portrayed.

Doppelgangers, body doubles are easy when a conspiracy is 35 years in the making. And easier when recorders have centuries to perfect the telling of the story.

Just my humble opinion in answer to the OP. No attempt to convince anyone else.

So, is it correct that you are “choosing….not to believe in the biblical account of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection?”

You seem to explain away Jesus’ minisitry as a cavalcade of trickery and written falsehoods.


Or, will you say something like “God has failed to convince me?”

Can you please supply links to the writings you refer to here?

Seems you think they are signicifant.

Got it. thanks. You're correct.

Sometimes I have to be hit over the head twice before I get the point. Just ask my wife...

Ed

How do you explain the growth of the early Jesus movement…? It was a tiny group of men (some of whom might’ve even been teenagers) that was sandwiched between the powerful Jewish Temple (the very center of the religion of Judaism)…that despised them and wanted them to be nonexistent…and the mighty Roman Empire…who also despised them and wanted them to be nonexistent. Yet, despite the persecution from both of these entities (and the Jewish Temple was the first of those to persecute Jesus and His followers), the early Jesus movement spread like an airborne contagion.

What fueled it…? It certainly wasn’t fueled by something that was written. It was fueled by something extraordinary that happened. Even Bart Erhman asserts that the rapid growth of early Christianity was due to something extraordinary that happened. The movement of the once tiny group of Jesus’ earliest and most devoted followers eventually replaced the entire pantheon of Roman and barbarian gods, and it saw the end of the Jewish Temple (and ancient Judaism) and the Roman Empire ~ both of whom had been powerful and mighty entities that had tried…and failed…to stamp this tiny group…along with its movement…out of existence.

Even Bart Erhman concedes that “The ancient triumph of Christianity proved to be the single greatest cultural transformation our world has ever seen.”

Easy. Divine Providence.

Hope and meaning to life. Offer hope and many people are willing to take the offer.

Don't make the mistake of confusing biblical
theological narrative marketing with actual history.

Historians don't substantiate alleged miracles
or the supernatural. Prof.Bart Ehrman and other
PhD Historians of classic antiquity will tell you this.

I gave you the university and the prominent professors
Now go research their work like an adult. Roman record
from antiquity is easily found regarding Pontius Pilate
if you know how to do basic historical research.You can
start with Flavius Josephus.

The story of the Prodigal Son is literally about how God deals with us when we sin and what sin does to us. In the story, the PS renounced his father, took his inheritance and left. In Jewish tradition, that son would be dead to his father, i.e. he would not be accepted back. But in this case the father welcomed the son with open arms when the son came back expressing his contrition, even though it was an imperfect contrition.

This shows several things. That mortal sin makes us dead to God. That confessing our sins restores our relationship with God. And, no matter what we do, God is always more than happy to welcome us back and will even celebrate our reconciliation.

So, is it correct that are choosing to discount and do not believe the biblical narrative and so are accepting or the “historians” view?

Edit to add: So, who were the “historians” of the day?

Nah, you just lifted something out of some other publication and then ….lazily….simply plodded along with them.

History is established through multiple lines evidence. The gospels are our sole source of information that we have on Jesus, and they are written by unknown authors/believers decades or more after the described events.

Many would argue that there are indeed “multiple lines” of evidence.

One of you can correct me if I am wrong but wasn’t it Bart Ehrman that said that there is more evidence corroborating the historicity of Jesus than any other figure from “antiquity.”

You just choose to disbelieve the evidence…..

”With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) — sources that originated in Jesus’ native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). Historical sources like that are pretty astounding for an ancient figure of any kind. ...the claim that Jesus was simply made up falters on every ground. ... like it or not, Jesus certainly existed.” - Bart Ehrman

Can I choose to believe David Copperfield made a 747 disappear into the ether?

When I know the law of conservation of mass and energy?

Can I choose to believe Justin Willman can levitate simply with the power of his mind?

When I know the law of gravity and equal and opposite forces?

I can no more CHOOSE to believe YOUR God is real than you can choose to believe the sun is actually Opollo racing across the sky in a flaming horse drawn chariot.

You KNOW Apollo is a myth!

Do you think that some people…maybe a lotta people…who don’t believe in God reject Him for volitional reasons rather than for intellectual reasons…?

Well, you are indeed making a choice…. Do not be confused about that.


So, I am correct that you do not believe….. by you own choice …….based on your interpretation of evidence available… ….. that you …. after considering the evidence …. conclude that Jesus ….”My God” If you will…. Do not believe the biblical account of Jesus life, death and resurrection?

I think there’s very good evidence that Christianity is true. When it comes to atheism, I think it takes a lot more faith to be an atheist than a Christian.

For hundreds of years, the Jewish tribes got along fine with their priests as the only form of government. But just like any group with a monopoly of control, the priesthood got greedy and oppressive. Absolute power......and all that.

Then the Romans came along and civilized the world. All the sudden the peasants had to supports TWO governing bodies, not to mention the legal conflicts arising with deciding to follow the old laws, or abide by Roman Law.

No longer were Jews allowed to pick up arms and slaughter any village or tribe they disagreed with and claim it was God's divine will. The Roman Army took a dim view of such shenanigans.

The Jews were desperate for for change.

I believe Christ was a tool of a cabal of revisionist priests striving to save what they could of the Jewish tradition, before it was wiped from the Earth.

I believe the Cabal included Zachariah and Elizabeth, as Mary was living at their home prior to marriage to Joseph.

How did the Christian movement grow so rapidly?

How did the reformation grow so rapidly? It has been only 500 years since inception, yet observe the explosion of Protestant churches.

How did the the Bolsheviks envelope Russia in only a few years?

The Nazis took all of Europe in only a few years.

MAGA has taken America by storm with almost 1/2 our population supporting Trump ten years after inception.

How big is the Morman Church after only 200 years?

When there is a need, and a leader emerges, people flock to follow.

But that is just my take on the subject.

I can not imagine that any would argue that Jesus Christ the man, did not exist.

Can you look at the sky, and choose to believe that blue is actually scarlet?
Can you look at the sun and choose to believe it is actually a flaming chariot?

How can you even dream that such belief is a choice?

If you are making a choice, it is in behavior. Not in actual belief.

Sure, I could make a choice to behave as if I believed. Were the Inquisition rampant, I would have to pretend such or face the question, and burned at the stake.

But it would be hypocrisy.

I would put it a different way.

I believe most people who believe in God do so for volitional reasons rather than intellectual.

See the discussion with TF49 in regard to "choice".

Question Jesus's existence no.
His divinity yes.

Well, that is a good clear answer! Fair enough….

I have followed the Cambridge history professors for some yrs
as I have with Bart Ehrman and Richard Carrier all PhD qualified
and peer reviewed.
If you dont want to read up on them that's your problem.


I gave you Flavius Josephus to start with
You can easily research to find other Roman
historians of the 1st and 2nd century period.
It's like you want to be spoon fed like a child.

Christopher Hitchens seemed to be really mad at God. He called God a cosmic North Korean dictator. He seemed to hate Him; he just seemed to not want there to be a God.

Thomas Nagle said that it’s not just that he didn’t believe in God, he said that he didn’t want there to be a God, he said he didn’t want the universe to be that way. And he said that one of the most disturbing things to him was that some of the most intelligent people he knew were believers.

Nietzsche said that if someone were to prove the God of Christianity to him, that he would believe him all the less.

Prominent atheists…professed beacons of reason…all of em’, and their reasons for rejecting God seem to be volitional rather than intellectual.

It has been argued endlessly, yet there is still no evidence from multiple independent, objective sources....of course, Josephus, Tacitus, et al, were not witnesses.

Again, historians dont corroborate miracles/ supernatural claims like resurrection.
Bart Ehrman clearly states such..You have switched from the subjective faith claim
of resurrection to the objective historical existence case for a Jesus.

A Jesus actually existing in no way proves
a virgin birth ,resurrection or turning water
to wine.

”With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) — sources that originated in Jesus’ native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). Historical sources like that are pretty astounding for an ancient figure of any kind. ...the claim that Jesus was simply made up falters on every ground. ... like it or not, Jesus certainly existed.” - Bart Ehrman

Bart Ehrmans historical studies don't support
supernatural claims that droves of Xtians base
their faith on.

Xtian Apologetics and Historicity don't mix.

But Jesus predicted the end of the Jewish Temple (the very center of ancient Judaism)…! And on August 6 in 70 AD when the Roman Legion completely destroyed the Jewish Temple…and it was literally wiped from the earth…the Mosaic covenant was never officially practiced again because it became impossible to do so.

Bart Erhman asserts that the eventual triumph of Christianity was because it advocated for a “salvation that was not tied to explicit Jewish identity”… and this swung the doors wide open to the conversion of the Gentile pagan world.

In a world of 90 and 100 hour work weeks. When work was back breaking digging in the Earth trying to keep enough food around to keep your babies alive for another week.

When famine, pestilence, disease, or enslavement lurked around every corner. That promise of salvation and everlasting plenty was a pretty attractive fantasy.

Again, in answer to the OP. In a world of 30 to 40 hour work weeks. In a world where even the slackest of slackers are well fed and provided medical care. We have achieved Heaven on Earth.

More baloney…. You made a clear statement that the NT depiction of Pilate is at odds with “historians.”

You apparently cannot back up this very specific allegation.

And…. I doubt you will even try…

Ok, so you will agree that Jesus was a very real historical figure….. and one who has had significant and lasting impact on mankind.

Do you agree?

And again…. You don’t get it…. I don’t know a single Christian that bases their “faith in Jesus” on the record of miracles in the NT.

I happen to believe them….but that is not the basis of my faith and belief.

You know not whereof you speak…..again.

Seriously , You really need to get out more.

Sure, you can develop a multitude of reasons to justify your unbelief.

The Pharisees …. the scholars of the Jewish culture….knew the messianic prophecies…..saw Jesus do miracles and they also refused to believe Jesus as Messiah.