Jesus, Jew, Mohammed, it's true...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lemon... as a believer, The Bible I have, "suppressed" as the New Age movement may have U believe it is, since it doesn't include "Gospels" like Thomas' that completely humanize Jesus or have him being married, etc, is 2 me, the inspired Word Of God, and being that God has inspired men 2 write it, he has been involved in the selection of the books. That may not seem logical 2 U, but it's a little thing called faith. A great man about 2000 years ago stated just a touch of it could move mountains....
 
The Disciple said:
Lemon... as a believer, The Bible I have, "suppressed" as the New Age movement may have U believe it is, since it doesn't include "Gospels" like Thomas' that completely humanize Jesus or have him being married, etc, is 2 me, the inspired Word Of God, and being that God has inspired men 2 write it, he has been involved in the selection of the books. That may not seem logical 2 U, but it's a little thing called faith. A great man about 2000 years ago stated just a touch of it could move mountains....

You make too many assumptions here. I'm part of no "New Age movement," and the Gnostic texts are rightly excluded from the New Testament. A lot of them date from around A.D. 200 or so, well after Jesus' death and resurrection.

My point is that the NT didn't just fall from the heavens in one piece. It was created by humans, and, due to the early church's records, along with the Vatican's tendency to be a pack rat, we still have all the original arguments and debates on file. And it took them over 300 years to make the consensus that we now call the "New Testament."

Even Martin Luther recognized this. Why else would he have cut out several books from the OT and deem them "apocryphal"? The Dead Sea Scrolls ultimately proved him wrong, as all of the "apocryphal" texts appeared in there, but I don't see Protestantism making a mad rush to add the "apocryphal" texts to the OT. Instead, they've seemingly been pretty happy going 500 years with an incomplete OT. It's honestly always been about tradition, not accuracy.

Faith is good and all, but, as I see it, an inflexible insistence that things will happen the way we interpret the Bible with no deviation is what got the Pharisees in trouble. The Book of Revelation may very well be true...but as a metaphor--just as the OT Messianic prophesies proved to be metaphorical as well.

Melon
 
melon said:


You make too many assumptions here. I'm part of no "New Age movement," and the Gnostic texts are rightly excluded from the New Testament. A lot of them date from around A.D. 200 or so, well after Jesus' death and resurrection.

My point is that the NT didn't just fall from the heavens in one piece. It was created by humans, and, due to the early church's records, along with the Vatican's tendency to be a pack rat, we still have all the original arguments and debates on file. And it took them over 300 years to make the consensus that we now call the "New Testament."

Even Martin Luther recognized this. Why else would he have cut out several books from the OT and deem them "apocryphal"? The Dead Sea Scrolls ultimately proved him wrong, as all of the "apocryphal" texts appeared in there, but I don't see Protestantism making a mad rush to add the "apocryphal" texts to the OT. Instead, they've seemingly been pretty happy going 500 years with an incomplete OT. It's honestly always been about tradition, not accuracy.

Faith is good and all, but, as I see it, an inflexible insistence that things will happen the way we interpret the Bible with no deviation is what got the Pharisees in trouble. The Book of ********** may very well be true...but as a metaphor--just as the OT Messianic prophesies proved to be metaphorical as well.

Melon

Like I say 2 my fellow friends that share different interpretations of prophecy... "I hope U're right, and that Jesus' second return could b in complete peace without blood shed, but with the violent world we have on our hands, where thousands of God's children are abused everyday, where every superpower in the world has a dozen nukes pointed at all the other superpowers, and where hopelessness just thrives over hope, I don't see a peaceful and easy way out 4 the evildoers this time."

Also, U have 2 look at the MULTIPLE Old Testament prophecies that said that Messiah would come and not be recognized, that he would come and be led as a sheep 2 slaughter, and not complain, etc. etc..... The majority of the REMAINING Prophecies regarding Messiah and His appearing have 2 do with him coming 4 His people, and ridding the world of evil. I don't see that as doom and gloom.... 2 me, that's a message of hope.

One thing regarding the Apocrypha.... a lot of those books are actually mentioned in the Bible, and I think they make good extras, but I don't believe they are "necessary". I haven't found anything groundbreaking 4 me, personally.

As 4 Gnostic Gospels, I have nothing nice 2 say about them, so I'll refrain.
 
Last edited:
The Disciple said:
Like I say 2 my fellow friends that share different interpretations of prophecy... "I hope U're right, and that Jesus' second return could b in complete peace without blood shed, but with the violent world we have on our hands, where thousands of God's children are abused everyday, where every superpower in the world has a dozen nukes pointed at all the other superpowers, and where hopelessness just thrives over hope, I don't see a peaceful and easy way out 4 the evildoers this time."

The world was more violent 2000 years ago. After Rome conquered Carthage, the entire populace was enslaved. Dissidents were killed using increasingly brutal methods--which they had mostly learned from the Persian Empire, which existed several hundreds years B.C. In A.D. 70, Rome finally decided they had enough with Jerusalem, so not only did they destroy the city, but an estimated 1 million Jews were killed and the rest, in typical Roman fashion, were enslaved and dispersed throughout the empire.

In their violent world, Jesus still came peacefully.

During the time of the Reformation, not only was the entire Christian church rampant with worldly imperialist corruption, but we also had the Bubonic Plague that killed 1/3 of Europe over 300 years. And wars? They were literally incessant. If it wasn't the 300 years of Crusades, it was the Hundred Years War. And if it wasn't that, a monarch that just woke up out of the wrong side of the bed one day could very well just decide to start a war. And it happened for such illogical reasons, not to mention the Inquisition. The Papal Inquisition engaged in mindnumbingly cruel torture methods.

In their violent world, Jesus didn't come.

If violence is somehow the "meter" of how we expect "the end" to happen, then Jesus should have come 500 years ago. The present, despite all the religious fearmongering, is perhaps the most peaceful and conscionable of all history.

I'm mostly interested in how Paul treated the next coming of Christ, since the Book of Revelation wasn't in existence during his lifetime. Paul was genuinely optimistic, but told his impatient followers to live their lives normally. I tend to think that he did not believe in all that "gloom and doom" of Revelation.

Melon
 
Last edited:
melon said:


The world was more violent 2000 years ago. After Rome conquered Carthage, the entire populace was enslaved. Dissidents were killed using increasingly brutal methods--which they had mostly learned from the Persian Empire, which existed several hundreds years B.C. In A.D. 70, Rome finally decided they had enough with Jerusalem, so not only did they destroy the city, but an estimated 1 million Jews were killed and the rest, in typical Roman fashion, were enslaved and dispersed throughout the empire.

In their violent world, Jesus still came peacefully.

During the time of the Reformation, not only was the entire Christian church rampant with worldly imperialist corruption, but we also had the Bubonic Plague that killed 1/3 of Europe over 300 years. And wars? They were literally incessant. If it wasn't the 300 years of Crusades, it was the Hundred Years War. And if it wasn't that, a monarch that just woke up out of the wrong side of the bed one day could very well just decide to start a war. And it happened for such illogical reasons, not to mention the Inquisition. The Papal Inquisition engaged in mindnumbingly cruel torture methods.

In their violent world, Jesus didn't come.

If violence is somehow the "meter" of how we expect "the end" to happen, then Jesus should have come 500 years ago. The present, despite all the religious fearmongering, is perhaps the most peaceful and conscionable of all history.

I'm mostly interested in how Paul treated the next coming of Christ, since the Book of ********** wasn't in existence during his lifetime. Paul was genuinely optimistic, but told his impatient followers to live their lives normally. I tend to think that he did not believe in all that "gloom and doom" of **********.

Melon

Again, Ur interpretation of ********** is doom and gloom, not mine. I don't believe peaceful children of God have anything 2 fear. However, evildoers WILL have something 2 fear this time around. Last time he came 2 redeem, this time 2 judge.

What do U think he's gonna do? Come join the UN and make give everybody amnesty? Or give the sheep what they've been promised and the goats what they have coming 2 them?

Remember, we all ALL creations of God, but we are not all CHILDREN of God. Jesus himself stated that they are many who are children of the Devil, and God will judge accordingly. That's not 4 man 2 do, but I don't believe the peace will come this time without eliminating those who have clearly, by that time, chosen between God and his adversary. The Bible speaks of an eternal peace that will come one day, and I believe it will, but things will have 2 happen b4 that's realized.

Doom and gloom? Not 4 me. I sleep well at night as it pertains 2 my soul. I don't preach hellfire and brimstone, but I do believe there's a wrong and a right, and U are totally responsible, and will have 2 answer 4, which side U picked.

As 4 Ur comments about the age Jesus arrived in2, yes, it was bad....but there were not Plagues, Murders and natural disasters, let alone wars, as there are now, all going on at ONCE.

I'm interested, though..... what DO U believe regarding Jesus' second coming? How will he come back? What will he do? How about the evildoers? No judgment? Or justice? Which?..... Please indulge me. :|
 
melon said:


The present, despite all the religious fearmongering, is perhaps the most peaceful and conscionable of all history.
.

Melon

I didn't notice this comment the 1st time around.... do U honestly BELIEVE that?
 
The Disciple said:
I didn't notice this comment the 1st time around.... do U honestly BELIEVE that?

I do, because it's true. Fluffy romanticist media has long obscured this fact.

Melon
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Yeah you've lost all credibility.:|

4 calling U out on the fact that U can't back Ur remarks up, and that U selectively attack certain parts of a post without addressing them in their fullness? That's idiotic, and I'll call anybody out on that.

Now, would U like 2 address the last post I made 2 U or not?

Here's the post again, just in case U'd missed the rest of it:

Bonovox, 4 ur info, I have not been "FED" anything, my friend... I don't believe in institution of religion, it gets in the way of God.... and what I have learned about Islam has been from the dozen or so friends I've had in my life who are MUSLIMS themselves, imbecile.

Most of them are moderate, but even those have confirmed what is taught in Islam regarding Israel. Did U also know that Islamic law teaches that any land that has been conquered by Islam, only 2 b lost (Jerusalem, for example), is the duty of all of Islam's followers 2 help reclaim?

Ever read a book called The Trouble With Islam: A Muslim's Call for Reform In Her Faith? I happened 2 have met the author and had a very good conversation with her that ended in us praying 4 each other and the extremists and evildoers who use our respective 'religions' 2 kill or judge in the name of "God." But she, a lifelong Muslim, attacks tough issues like Anti-Semitism in Islam, the absolute DEGREDATION of Women in Islam.... Issues that U, apparently, have no knowledge of, yet pretend 2 know everything that matters about it. Talk about an issue when U actually KNOW what U're talking about, or U'll just end up looking as ridiculous as U just have over the last week.

I would say Ur location.... "in a state of denial" explains Ur personality just fine.
 
The Disciple said:
Lemon... as a believer, The Bible I have, "suppressed" as the New Age movement may have U believe it is

I'm not sure precisely what you mean by 'New Age Movement.'

If you are referring to Pagan beliefs they have been around a lot longer than Christianity, incidentally.

Wicca, Odinism, etc - these belief systems are thousands of years older than Christianity.

Taking a long term perspective, Christianity is a New Age Movement, as is Islam.
 
Last edited:
The Disciple said:
Again, Ur interpretation of ********** is doom and gloom, not mine. I don't believe peaceful children of God have anything 2 fear. However, evildoers WILL have something 2 fear this time around. Last time he came 2 redeem, this time 2 judge.

And that's the funny thing about this comment. Zoroastrian / Pharisaic theology said that Judgment Day was supposed to happen the first time around. And when it didn't, we merely postponed it to the Second Coming. I'm waiting for us to be as equally disappointed as the Pharisees.

I'm curious as to why you put the **********. I didn't realize that "Revelation" was a profanity.

What do U think he's gonna do? Come join the UN and make give everybody amnesty? Or give the sheep what they've been promised and the goats what they have coming 2 them?

I think it's arrogant to presume that we know what God will do. Who knows....Jesus may return as peacefully as He did the first time around, and then we'll postpone it to the Third Coming. And then we'll say it's so logical, because "3" is the number of God / the trinity / blah blah blah.

Remember, we all ALL creations of God, but we are not all CHILDREN of God. Jesus himself stated that they are many who are children of the Devil, and God will judge accordingly.

Mind quoting that passage?

I'm interested, though..... what DO U believe regarding Jesus' second coming? How will he come back? What will he do? How about the evildoers? No judgment? Or justice? Which?..... Please indulge me. :|

I don't presume to know. Jesus could come at any moment in time, whether today or 10,000 years from now. And He may come as peacefully as He did the first time around, much to the consternation of the Pharisees, or not. Who knows?

Melon
 
financeguy said:


I'm not sure precisely what you mean by 'New Age Movement.'

If you are referring to Pagan beliefs they have been around a lot longer than Christianity, incidentally.

New Age movement creatively combines these 'beliefs' and groups them along with ALL of the world's religions.... and says they're all the same.... we all workship the same 'god'.... we are all "one".... bulls**t!
 
The Disciple said:
'beliefs'

So you are now insulting Paganism. Interesting. Fair enough, in return I will henceforth refer to Christianity as a 'belief' system.
 
melon said:


And that's the funny thing about this comment. Zoroastrian / Pharisaic theology said that Judgment Day was supposed to happen the first time around. And when it didn't, we merely postponed it to the Second Coming. I'm waiting for us to be as equally disappointed as the Pharisees.

I'm curious as to why you put the **********. I didn't realize that "**********" was a profanity.



I think it's arrogant to presume that we know what God will do. Who knows....Jesus may return as peacefully as He did the first time around, and then we'll postpone it to the Third Coming. And then we'll say it's so logical, because "3" is the number of God / the trinity / blah blah blah.



Mind quoting that passage?



I don't presume to know. Jesus could come at any moment in time, whether today or 10,000 years from now. And He may come as peacefully as He did the first time around, much to the consternation of the Pharisees, or not. Who knows?

Melon

Jesus never said he'd come back 2 more times, that's not Biblical....

the passage? John 8:37-47

Obviously, nobody knows the time except the Father, but my question is where do U gather Ur information that makes U so strongly believe that He will return in one manner and not the other? Is it Biblical? If so, please enlighten me.
 
financeguy said:
Er, yes, there were.

You're correct. The 1815 eruption of Tambora in Indonesia was worse than any volcanic eruption of our day. There was enough ash to cause global cooling and make it the year without a summer.

Plagues...the Bubonic Plague killed 1/3 of Europe over 300 years, and this was during the Hundred Years War. In fact, many people believed it to be the end of the world back then, and it is said that the dissatisfaction over all the misery that happened in Europe without the Second Coming happening was what sparked the mass questioning of religion that eventually culminated into the Protestant Reformation.

In fact, we have generally had incessant wars throughout history, with only minor interludes.

Melon
 
financeguy said:


So you are now insulting Paganism. Interesting. Fair enough, in return I will henceforth refer to Christianity as a 'belief' system.

Fair enough. I have no problem with U doing so. I can tolerate my brothers who have opposing 'beliefs', and even those who don't agree what I do..... it sometimes makes 4 better conversation that way anyway. :wink:
 
The Disciple said:
Jesus never said he'd come back 2 more times, that's not Biblical....

And before the New Testament, it said the Messiah would come once, not twice.

Melon
 
melon said:


And before the New Testament, it said the Messiah would come once, not twice.

Melon

If that's the case, Melon.... then the Prophecy of Zachariah 12:10 regarding Messiah's return, and how the world will look on "Me who they pierced" makes no sense.

He was referring 2 a crucifixion, and later a return in which the world, specifically the Jews, now recognize their Messiah is the Jew named "Yeshua" who was crucified thousands of years ago.
 
The Disciple said:


4 calling U out on the fact that U can't back Ur remarks up, and that U selectively attack certain parts of a post without addressing them in their fullness? That's idiotic, and I'll call anybody out on that.

I would say Ur location.... "in a state of denial" explains Ur personality just fine.

Lovely, more personal attacks. How Christian of you.:|

The Disciple said:
Most of them are moderate, but even those have confirmed what is taught in Islam regarding Israel. Did U also know that Islamic law teaches that any land that has been conquered by Islam, only 2 b lost (Jerusalem, for example), is the duty of all of Islam's followers 2 help reclaim?

I have close friends who are Muslim and took religion class in college that dealt with the differences of the world's main religions and my friends don't remember being taught the eradification of Jews as you say. Now many may twist their religion to justify this, the same way many with twist Christianity to justify the KKK or the murder of abortion doctors. But these differences have to be defined.



The Disciple said:

Ever read a book called The Trouble With Islam: A Muslim's Call for Reform In Her Faith? I happened 2 have met the author and had a very good conversation with her that ended in us praying 4 each other and the extremists and evildoers who use our respective 'religions' 2 kill or judge in the name of "God." But she, a lifelong Muslim, attacks tough issues like Anti-Semitism in Islam, the absolute DEGREDATION of Women in Islam....
No, never read the book and yes both religions need to look at our leaders and those that are twisting the religion, but this is an entirely different issue than what you mentioned before.

The Disciple said:

Issues that U, apparently, have no knowledge of, yet pretend 2 know everything that matters about it. Talk about an issue when U actually KNOW what U're talking about, or U'll just end up looking as ridiculous as U just have over the last week.
Now this is where I don't understand you, it's constant personal attacks and the above issues had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about earlier, so how would you know what the hell I know about this subject? What is your problem?
 
LOL... I've always called myself a believer, but "Christian", I've always said, I'm far from. That means Christ-like, and I have a LONG way 2 go.... but the fact that He loves me in spite of my infinite faults is One of the many reasons why Jesus is so unique.

And stating very clearly that U don't back Urself up and don't seem 2 know what U're talking about is not the same as insulting. U've done nothing 2 prove me wrong so far. I appreciate the apologetic approach U have taken 2 defend Islam, but if U remember, I'm not attacking Islam..... I'm just calling it as I see it, and as many others see it. "Christianity" has its share of issues as well, and I don't defend those, but if U remember how our little debate started...

Agreement is not a prerequisite for Coexistence.
 
The Disciple said:
LOL... I've always called myself a believer, but "Christian", I've always said, I'm far from. That means Christ-like, and I have a LONG way 2 go.... but the fact that He loves me in spite of my infinite faults is One of the many reasons why Jesus is so unique.

And stating very clearly that U don't back Urself up and don't seem 2 know what U're talking about is not the same as insulting. U've done nothing 2 prove me wrong so far. I appreciate the apologetic approach U have taken 2 defend Islam, but if U remember, I'm not attacking Islam..... I'm just calling it as I see it, and as many others see it. "Christianity" has its share of issues as well, and I don't defend those, but if U remember how our little debate started...

Agreement is not a prerequisite for Coexistence.

You're still completely missing the mark so I'm dismissing myself from this discussion or lack thereof.

You made the statement that the Muslim religion called for the eradification of Jews, you haven't been able to back that up, you twist the argument by bringing in other issues that had nothing to do with the original question asked of you, there is no discussion here.

I'm not defending Islam, in fact you probably won't find me defending any organized religion. But I do like to bring facts into debates and to keep the discussion in line with the questions asked and not cover up with smoke and mirrors.

Good bye.:|
 
The Disciple said:
Awww... he's gone.... and we never got any facts from him..... :ohmy:
:rolleyes: See this is exactly what I'm talking about, YOU are the one that made the statement, YOU are the one that was questioned about it by more than one, so it's up to YOU to back that statement up...and you haven't.

How am I suppose to bring facts to dispute a statement you haven't backed up?

The process of debate has rules, otherwise there is no debate. If you can't back up the original statement then there's no debate.:shrug: I can't make it any clearer.
 
The Disciple said:
If that's the case, Melon.... then the Prophecy of Zachariah 12:10 regarding Messiah's return, and how the world will look on "Me who they pierced" makes no sense.

He was referring 2 a crucifixion, and later a return in which the world, specifically the Jews, now recognize their Messiah is the Jew named "Yeshua" who was crucified thousands of years ago.

It may predict a crucifixion, although Zachariah 12:11 is quite amusing:

"On that day the mourning in Jerusalem shall be as great as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the plain of Megiddo."

"Megiddo" is supposedly where "armageddon" came from, and if it is implying what I think it is, the end of the world did not come after the First Coming.

Regardless, it makes no value judgment on the number of times that Jesus would come. In fact, I don't think Jesus Himself ever put a limit on the number of times He could come. He just said He'd come "again."

And regarding "when," there's no judgment on that. Humanity long presumed it would be around the year 2000. Why? Perhaps because it's a nice round number? It doesn't matter. It's been said that Jesus would come when we'd least suspect it anyway, so why would He choose the most obvious year of them all? Who knows...it could be the year 2347, for all we know.

My overall point was that the Pharisees were expecting a warrior Christ and they didn't get it. We're expecting a warrior Christ, and we may get it or we may not. And I bet that if we don't get the "warrior Christ," we'll have a lot of Christians in the same position as the Pharisees someday.

Melon
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
:rolleyes: See this is exactly what I'm talking about, YOU are the one that made the statement, YOU are the one that was questioned about it by more than one, so it's up to YOU to back that statement up...and you haven't.

There's no logic to religious arguments, by design. And using quotes from the same text you're trying to prove would be like Scientologists using "Dianetics" to prove that Scientology is a real religion.

Melon
 
melon said:


There's no logic to religious arguments, by design. And using quotes from the same text you're trying to prove would be like Scientologists using "Dianetics" to prove that Scientology is a real religion.

Melon

True but if someone were to make a statement about the Muslim religion I would at least want to start with the Koran rather than a Christian website speaking about the Muslim religion.
 
Weren't U gone, bonovox?! LOL....

As 4 Lemon... U danced around my question very well, I can almost admire it. No hard feelings.... :|
 
The Disciple said:
Weren't U gone, bonovox?! LOL....

As 4 Lemon... U danced around my question very well, I can almost admire it. No hard feelings.... :|

Not sure who Lemon is but yeah there seems to be a lot of dancing around questions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom