How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[EternalFantasies]

If Jesus had not been stopped at that point, it would not have been long before he did something that bothered the Romans. If the Biblical account is true, the people of Jerusalem were in a frenzy, or at least a state of fervent excitement, from the moment Jesus arrived. And he had already, as a public demonstration, staged what amounted to a small riot in the Temple. The danger of his raising a revolt -- or inspiring a revolt just by his presence -- was a very real one. And the Romans probably would not have let it get that far, at the first rumors of any such thing they would have arrested him (they wouldn't need a traitor's help to do it while avoiding needless bloodshed; they simply would have arrested him, and shed anyone's blood who got in their way), and the end result would have been the same.

What does one type when speechless? err.. wordless..... so much laughing in my head.

A tad presumptuous aren't we?

Although, I anxiously await the Bible addendum you'll release. Probably entitled:

"Jesus - The Kosher Alternative"

Written by: The KingOfOreos!

This guy:

https://teacheratsea.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/img_73741.jpg?w=731

 

[Tryharder62]

Jesus wasn't killed by religious people in order to atone their sins. He was killed by the Roman government for being a dissident.

Jesus' ministry shook up spiritual beliefs, political beliefs and other beliefs, that is for sure.

I love this and it is what I base my thoughts on:

John 29 So Pilate came outside to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this man?” 30 They replied, “If this man were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you.” 31 Pilate told them, “Take him yourselves and pass judgment on him according to your own law!” The Jewish religious leaders replied, “We cannot legally put anyone to death.” 32 This happened to fulfill the word Jesus spoke indicating what kind of death he was going to die. 33 So Pilate went back into the governor’s residence, summoned Jesus, and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?” 34 Jesus replied, “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or have others said it to you about me?” 35 Pilate answered, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own people and your chief priests handed you over to me. What have you done?” 36 Jesus replied, “My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my servants would fight to prevent me being handed over to the Jewish authorities. But now my kingdom is not from here.” 37 Then Pilate said, “So you are a king!” Jesus replied, “You say that I am a king. I have been born and have come into the world for this reason—to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.” 38 Pilate asked, “What is truth?”

I can't underline like I would like to on the device I am using so I apologize.

I look at vs 32 and see that it happened this way because it was the fulfillment of the word Jesus had spoken as to the kind of death he was going to die.

I look at vs 36 to find Jesus' truth. If it was for political reasons that he was doing this he would have had his servants prevent him from being handed over to the Jewish authorities. He did it this way because his ministry is to testify to the truth. I'm sure the government was not pleased with his claims.

I am sure his ministry had far reaching ramifications. Most significant is that he could have stopped the crucifixion, but he didn't. He chose to die for our sins. Humbling!

 

[phrodeau]

(edited)

For example, Intelligent design proponents say the eyes of vertebrates--including humans and the common snapping turtle--could not have evolved in a stepwise fashion. That's because the eye is made of several interacting parts, and the removal of any one part will cause the entire system to cease functioning. Thus, the argument goes, the eye must have been produced in one fell swoop.

This is very, very false.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwew5gHoh3E

 

[Tryharder62]

This is very, very false.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwew5gHoh3E

It seems like he is saying different species have different eyes. No brainer. The thing Dawkins wants to do is claim that suddenly there is a lens or a cornea.

"If you look at these [evolutionary] schemes, they often very abruptly add a lens or a cornea," said Casey Luskin, a spokesperson for the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based organization that advocates intelligent design. But things don't just appear suddenly in evolution, Luskin said. "You need to evolve things in a step-by-step fashion."

 

[phrodeau]

It seems like he is saying different species have different eyes. No brainer. The thing Dawkins wants to do is claim that suddenly there is a lens or a cornea.

"If you look at these [evolutionary] schemes, they often very abruptly add a lens or a cornea," said Casey Luskin, a spokesperson for the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based organization that advocates intelligent design. But things don't just appear suddenly in evolution, Luskin said. "You need to evolve things in a step-by-step fashion."

Some evolutionary lines led to lenses and corneas and others did not. Some species do very well with very simple eyes.

Human retinas are the wrong way around, and the optic nerve, instead of sensibly attaching to the retina from behind, attaches in front, leaving a blind spot where the nerve bundle goes through the retina. The eyes of cephalopods do not have this design flaw. What the hell is that about?

 

[jaF0]

You spilled jerkwads still hulaballooing about this make believe shit?

It's all made up. Ain't none of it real. You die, you rot. You don't go nowhere but to decomposition.

You go up in smoke and get stored in a jug on somebody's mantle. Or you go in the ground in a box (unless you're in New Orleans).

The really lucky ones rot out in the woods somewhere feeding the critters and insects, finally doing something useful.

 

[colddiesel]

Jesus' ministry shook up spiritual beliefs, political beliefs and other beliefs, that is for sure.

I love this and it is what I base my thoughts on:

John 29 So Pilate came outside to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this man?” 30 They replied, “If this man were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you.” 31 Pilate told them, “Take him yourselves and pass judgment on him according to your own law!” The Jewish religious leaders replied, “We cannot legally put anyone to death.” 32 This happened to fulfill the word Jesus spoke indicating what kind of death he was going to die. 33 So Pilate went back into the governor’s residence, summoned Jesus, and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?” 34 Jesus replied, “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or have others said it to you about me?” 35 Pilate answered, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own people and your chief priests handed you over to me. What have you done?” 36 Jesus replied, “My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my servants would fight to prevent me being handed over to the Jewish authorities. But now my kingdom is not from here.” 37 Then Pilate said, “So you are a king!” Jesus replied, “You say that I am a king. I have been born and have come into the world for this reason—to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.” 38 Pilate asked, “What is truth?”

I can't underline like I would like to on the device I am using so I apologize.

I look at vs 32 and see that it happened this way because it was the fulfillment of the word Jesus had spoken as to the kind of death he was going to die.

I look at vs 36 to find Jesus' truth. If it was for political reasons that he was doing this he would have had his servants prevent him from being handed over to the Jewish authorities. He did it this way because his ministry is to testify to the truth. I'm sure the government was not pleased with his claims.

I am sure his ministry had far reaching ramifications. Most significant is that he could have stopped the crucifixion, but he didn't. He chose to die for our sins. Humbling!

I s'pose you realize that John was written 3 full generations after Jesus' death, substantially in this quote to blame the Jews of Jerusalem rather than the Romans for his death. It is hardly an eye witness account! They of course could not answer the accusation because Rome had destroyed Jerusalem in AD70.

The Pauline Christians were setting the agenda now though it took them another 150 years to get the very Gnostic Book of John accepted into the Canon at all.

Now what was that story your great grandparents told you about their childhood, 100 years after the event?

John is a crap source by any standard.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Jesus was killed by the Romans but only because they were the civil government in Judea at the time. It was on the persistent instigation of the Jewish high priest who felt threatened by a popular itinerant reformist especially after his attack on the money traders and merchants in the temple.

If one tries to hold up the Jews as Christ killers one must do the same with the Italians. Moneyed interest, conservative orthodoxy and a military dictatorship killed Jesus.

 

[jaF0]

I s'pose you realize that John was written 3 full generations after Jesus' death,

You say that like it's some sort of fact.

It's all fucking make believe you stupid fucking morons!!!

 

[jaF0]

As far as I'm concerned, it was all written by a couple of guys named Bill and Ted, who jumped into their phone booth and dialed 'S-t-u-p-i-d p-e-o-p-l-e -e-r-a' then dropped it off down a mountainside in the middle of a bunch or idiots wearing blankets and towels.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Jesus of Nazareth did live. He was a popular itinerant reformist preacher who was killed by the Roman civil government on the persistent demands of the Jewish high priests.

Everything after that is hokum mixed with a bunch of hearsay.

The basic teachings of Jesus are quite good words to live by. The commentaries and extrapolations of his followers get quite a bit pedantic and self serving.

 

[EternalFantasies]

I s'pose you realize that John was written 3 full generations after Jesus' death, substantially in this quote to blame the Jews of Jerusalem rather than the Romans for his death. It is hardly an eye witness account! They of course could not answer the accusation because Rome had destroyed Jerusalem in AD70.

The Pauline Christians were setting the agenda now though it took them another 150 years to get the very Gnostic Book of John accepted into the Canon at all.

Now what was that story your great grandparents told you about their childhood, 100 years after the event?

John is a crap source by any standard.

??

Now this makes no sense. The same account is in Mathew,27, the earliest Gospel.

Clearly shows how the Jews grabbed him at the requests of the High Priest, and the blasphemy charge, and the request to Pilate to crucify him.

 

[Tryharder62]

Some evolutionary lines led to lenses and corneas and others did not. Some species do very well with very simple eyes.

Human retinas are the wrong way around, and the optic nerve, instead of sensibly attaching to the retina from behind, attaches in front, leaving a blind spot where the nerve bundle goes through the retina. The eyes of cephalopods do not have this design flaw. What the hell is that about?

It is all very interesting to me.

You spilled jerkwads still hulaballooing about this make believe shit?

It's all made up. Ain't none of it real. You die, you rot. You don't go nowhere but to decomposition.

You go up in smoke and get stored in a jug on somebody's mantle. Or you go in the ground in a box (unless you're in New Orleans).

The really lucky ones rot out in the woods somewhere feeding the critters and insects, finally doing something useful.

My parents are dead but I am pretty sure I am Belgian. My mom also told me that a lady should never hullaballoo!

 

[EternalFantasies]

John is a crap source by any standard.

May I just say..

For the Gospel that's the epitome in deep mysticism, insight, very advanced philosophy grouped together and succinctly written, deep and grand truths that science only recently relatively found the same..., the Book of John is a work of wonder to say the least.

May i just say.. and i may & should :

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/59339101/the-most-interesting-man-in-the-world-you-sir-are-a-moron.jpg

And a Grand one at that.

 

[Tryharder62]

Double post.

 

[jaF0]

Jesus of Nazareth did live.

So did Jesus of Tegucigalpa. Maybe more than one. So what?

 

[Tryharder62]

I s'pose you realize that John was written 3 full generations after Jesus' death, substantially in this quote to blame the Jews of Jerusalem rather than the Romans for his death. It is hardly an eye witness account! They of course could not answer the accusation because Rome had destroyed Jerusalem in AD70.

The Pauline Christians were setting the agenda now though it took them another 150 years to get the very Gnostic Book of John accepted into the Canon at all.

Now what was that story your great grandparents told you about their childhood, 100 years after the event?

John is a crap source by any standard.

I disagree, but if you don't like it check out the other gospels.

 

[Hard_Rom]

So did Jesus of Tegucigalpa. Maybe more than one. So what?

Considering the influence he had on Western thought and history he deserves a bit more than a so what.

Even atheists are probably closer to being nondemotional Christians. His basic teachings are followed by most Westerners. Turning the other cheek, forgive your enemies, refraining from hatred and lust, love your neighbour as you love yourself and the virtue of charity. These are found in many other religions but the wording he used resonates best with Western thought which he himself influenced.

Sometimes those who do not believe in God or a divine Jesus follow Jesus teachings better than some of his hardcore followers.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Some evolutionary lines led to lenses and corneas and others did not. Some species do very well with very simple eyes.

Human retinas are the wrong way around, and the optic nerve, instead of sensibly attaching to the retina from behind, attaches in front, leaving a blind spot where the nerve bundle goes through the retina. The eyes of cephalopods do not have this design flaw. What the hell is that about?

The Whimsical Designer.

 

[KingOrfeo]

May I just say..

For the Gospel that's the epitome in deep mysticism, insight, very advanced philosophy grouped together and succinctly written, deep and grand truths that science only recently relatively found the same..., the Book of John is a work of wonder to say the least.

None of that is relevant to its reliability as a historical record.

 

[Liar]

The Whimsical Designer.

Or just incompetence.

 

[EternalFantasies]

None of that is relevant to its reliability as a historical record.

that was another post.

The reliability based on his claim that John was added 3 generations later was shot by that the first Gospel of Mathew included the same historical account, which is in my preceding post.

Circular empty arguments again? U not gonna quite that?

 

[colddiesel]

I disagree, but if you don't like it check out the other gospels.

It's not a question of whether I like John's gospel, in fact it is definitely the most imaginative and interesting gospel - but as source material definitely the poorest. Its Gnostic philosophizing was despised by many early Church fathers, but his resurrection story got an otherwise unacceptable gospel into the canon - 150 years late!

Mark is the most reliable factually but written in poor Greek - but nevertheless the most important gospel because it was the first written and clearly was a source for both Matthew and Luke. I appreciate Matthew because it clearly emphasizes Jesus' Jewishness - his mission to "Teach the Law." It also expands importantly on what Jesus said.

Luke doesn't add much of substance to Matthew and Mark but Luke is by far the best writer of the four - and he has a good Christmas, story - which was written after the event to fit prophecy - but it's a nice yarn even with the errors of fact and timing.

A pity we do not have access to "Quelle."

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Archaeological Support The Bible:

https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/does-archaeology-support-the-bible/

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

This is very, very false.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwew5gHoh3E

It's not just the eye that couldn't have evolved. It's the 4 chamber heart, the two sexes, understanding of music in animals and humans, the eye and many other systems.