How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[RocketLauncher]

I have never understood how someone could look at the Old Testament prophecy for the coming of the Lord and Messiah and not see that Jesus fullfilled them. To each his own..... to me if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck it must be....................... a duck.

Or Jewish.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

If She/He were here, She/He wouldn't have had to send some long haired socialist to represent Her/Him. The New Testament wasn't written by Maud/God. Sheesh.
There is no mention of Jesus in the Old Testament. You do know that, right?

Jesus didn't have long hair relative to the culture of that day. It's not like they had scissors or clippers or something. They used swords and knives to cut their hair. Secondly, you are absolutely wrong about there being no mention of Jesus in the Old Testament, which was written hundreds of years before His birth. There are literally HUNDREDS of prophecies of Christ written in the OT that were fulfilled in His first coming. Would you like to see some?

 

[RocketLauncher]

Jesus didn't have long hair relative to the culture of that day. It's not like they had scissors or clippers or something. They used swords and knives to cut their hair. Secondly, you are absolutely wrong about there being no mention of Jesus in the Old Testament, which was written hundreds of years before His birth. There are literally HUNDREDS of prophecies of Christ written in the OT that were fulfilled in His first coming. Would you like to see some?

Sure, show me one passage where the name Jesus Christ is mentioned in the Old Testament.

 

[Tryharder62]

Or Jewish.

Exactly I just see the prophecy leading to Jesus.

 

[phrodeau]

Exactly I just see the prophecy leading to Jesus.

None of the Old Testament authors prophesied a human sacrifice to atone for Original Sin.

 

[colddiesel]

Exactly I just see the prophecy leading to Jesus.

No. I was brought up in the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland and know the Bible pretty much inside out. You see what you want to see, nothing more, nothing less. The so called prophecies of Jesus are baloney. You are like many other lost souls, your religion is a 'comfort station' to get you through what for most folk is a pretty dire life.

If you want a reference in the OT as total nonsense, read the dream/nightmares of Ezekial.

Jesus was a good man a good Jew and had good principles - a great example (though he occasionally made unkind remarks about Greeks and his mum). He was nothing else, not God, not the Son of God, nor any other part of that Trinitarian hogwash.

Tough assessment perhaps, but that's how it is.

 

[Antryg_Windrose]

Sigh, not this stupid argument again. "God" turned his back on man when he threw them out of Eden. In Revelations we all will rise from our graves and be separated into goats and sheep ( why the goats get the rough end of the stick I don't know, something to do with Pan?). So even according to the New Testament no one's in heaven or hell. Keep in mind the New Testament is a bastardized version of the bible and the old testament was passed down by word of mouth for generations so it's like a giant game of telephone. People added and subtracted bits they didn't like when it was being hand written and when printed versions became available, depending on the morals of the time.
The Torah, or the Old Testament make no mention of hell. According to the Tao if there is no hell there can be no heaven, life is a balance, there must be pain to feel pleasure.

http://www.thehypertexts.com/No Hell in the Bible.htm

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.haa...m-what-is-the-jewish-afterlife-like-1.5362876

To end on a light note:
There's a Jewish joke that says there's no Heaven or Hell: we all go to the same place when we die, where Moses and Rabbi Akiva give constant and everlasting classes on the Bible and the Talmud. For the righteous this is eternal bliss, while for the wicked this is eternal suffering.

By one account, all copies of Hebrew scripture were lost or destroyed during the Babylonian captivity, and upon their return, a priest rewrote it all from memory. Was his memory infallible or did maybe some scribal boo-boos creep in?

We know the ruling council of the new imperial religion re-arranged Hebrew scripture as a preface for their gospel, itself carefully winnowed and edited to suit imperial needs. Of course Caesar's tool tells you to render unto Caesar (pay your taxes) and await that pie in the sky when you die (shut up and keep working).

None of that matters. Everyone believes what they want.

 

[Tryharder62]

None of the Old Testament authors prophesied a human sacrifice to atone for Original Sin.

Prophecy: Isaiah 53:12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.

Fulfillment: Mark 15:27-28 And they crucified two robbers with Him, one on His right and one on His left. 28 (And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And He was numbered with transgressors.")

 

[RocketLauncher]

Prophecy: Isaiah 53:12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.

Fulfillment: Mark 15:27-28 And they crucified two robbers with Him, one on His right and one on His left. 28 (And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And He was numbered with transgressors.")

If Jesus existed how come there are no historical records of him? Don't quote the Josephus Wars, his writings were debunked.
Besides, wasn't the Messiah supposed to be called Immanuel?
Crucifixions were quite popular back in the day and I'm pretty sure a lot of people were crucified with theives beside, behind and in front of them.
You're going to have to try harder . Where specifically does the OT mention Jesus Christ by name? Anything else is just conjecture. Please stick to the original text and don't use the NT to prove your point. That was written AFTER the fact.

 

[Chancellor_Palpatine]

If Jesus existed how come there are no historical records of him? Don't quote the Josephus Wars, his writings were debunked.
Besides, wasn't the Messiah supposed to be called Immanuel?
Crucifixions were quite popular back in the day and I'm pretty sure a lot of people were crucified with theives beside, behind and in front of them.
You're going to have to try harder . Where specifically does the OT mention Jesus Christ by name? Anything else is just conjecture. Please stick to the original text and don't use the NT to prove your point. That was written AFTER the fact.

You don't need Jesus to get to heaven. All you need is my prehensile tongue.

 

[Tryharder62]

No. I was brought up in the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland and know the Bible pretty much inside out. You see what you want to see, nothing more, nothing less. The so called prophecies of Jesus are baloney. You are like many other lost souls, your religion is a 'comfort station' to get you through what for most folk is a pretty dire life.

If you want a reference in the OT as total nonsense, read the dream/nightmares of Ezekial.

Jesus was a good man a good Jew and had good principles - a great example (though he occasionally made unkind remarks about Greeks and his mum). He was nothing else, not God, not the Son of God, nor any other part of that Trinitarian hogwash.

Tough assessment perhaps, but that's how it is.

I agree with you in the fact that a person sees the bible through the lens of their experiences. I think that along the way you were hurt by the "church". What did Gandhi say?....I like your Christ but not your Christian.

Yes, my faith comforts me. Life is tough.

 

[RocketLauncher]

You don't need Jesus to get to heaven. All you need is my prehensile tongue.

Word.

I agree with you in the fact that a person sees the bible through the lens of their experiences. I think that along the way you were hurt by the "church". What did Gandhi say?....I like your Christ but not your Christian.

Yes, my faith comforts me. Life is tough.

No, I was never hurt by any religion. Exposed to too much of it's hypocrisies, perhaps.
I was an Anglican who attended a Presbyterian Church, had a Mormon for a brother, went to Catholic school and have a Jewish bil.
I'm not here to put down other people's belief in utter rubbish if it helps them to be decent people and it comforts them in their time of need, unfortunately decent, religious people are hard to find. Every believer wants to proclaim my religion is the right and only religion therefore your's sux i.e. Christian fundamentalists, Catholics, Shia Islam, Sunni Islam.

 

[phrodeau]

Prophecy: Isaiah 53:12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.

Fulfillment: Mark 15:27-28 And they crucified two robbers with Him, one on His right and one on His left. 28 (And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And He was numbered with transgressors.")

Two verses prior, Isaiah said the same guy would see his children and prolong his days. Where does that come into the story of Jesus, if it's related before his sacrifice?

 

[RocketLauncher]

For all we know the Messiah came and went and her/his name was Bob.

 

[ThatsTheGuy]

For all we know the Messiah came and went and her/his name was Bob.

No, it was 'Hey Zeus!'.

 

[Tryharder62]

If Jesus existed how come there are no historical records of him? Don't quote the Josephus Wars, his writings were debunked.
Besides, wasn't the Messiah supposed to be called Immanuel?
Crucifixions were quite popular back in the day and I'm pretty sure a lot of people were crucified with theives beside, behind and in front of them.
You're going to have to try harder . Where specifically does the OT mention Jesus Christ by name? Anything else is just conjecture. Please stick to the original text and don't use the NT to prove your point. That was written AFTER the fact.

You can deny He is divine but I don't think you can deny he lived. I wish I could find it earlier in this thread, but man this thread got big. Simple things like how we keep time. Time has been kept multiple ways, but for most of us we are keeping track of time by the fact that he lived and died BC AD. Jesus lived and died.

Look at those that disagree with Christianity. There were people who wrote about him having lived that disagreed with his teaching during that time.

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2017/who-is-jesus-according-to-other-religions/ AND

Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.


I recognize that I can't give you 100% proof that Jesus is God. There will always be an element of faith.

No, Jesus' name was not Immanuel, but Jesus was the meaning of Immanuel, "God with us." Immanuel is one of the many titles for Jesus, a description of who He is.

Well I tried harder. PSSST....I don't t think it was Bob!

 

[RocketLauncher]

You can deny He is divine but I don't think you can deny he lived. I wish I could find it earlier in this thread, but man this thread got big. Simple things like how we keep time. Time has been kept multiple ways, but for most of us we are keeping track of time by the fact that he lived and died BC AD. Jesus lived and died.

Look at those that disagree with Christianity. There were people who wrote about him having lived that disagreed with his teaching during that time.

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2017/who-is-jesus-according-to-other-religions/ AND

Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.


I recognize that I can't give you 100% proof that Jesus is God. There will always be an element of faith.

No, Jesus' name was not Immanuel, but Jesus was the meaning of Immanuel, "God with us." Immanuel is one of the many titles for Jesus, a description of who He is.

Well I tried harder. PSSST....I don't t think it was Bob!

There is no historical proof he lived at all. Show me one reliable written source, NT aside, and I might just change my mind.
Who in the ancient world believed in his existence? Names and the historical texts where his existence is documented that proves this, please.

Honey, if your faith makes it easier to get through this life then more power to you.

 

[Tryharder62]

Two verses prior, Isaiah said the same guy would see his children and prolong his days. Where does that come into the story of Jesus, if it's related before his sacrifice?

I think that it is talking spiritually. He raises from the dead and continues to minister until his ascension. We who believe won't be separated from him forever and ever. I am a child of God.

 

[RocketLauncher]

I think that it is talking spiritually. He raises from the dead and continues to minister until his ascension. We who believe won't be separated from him forever and ever. I am a child of God.

If you are a child of God's then maybe you're the Messiah?!
Couldn't find any Historically written texts? Too bad.
No worries, you're not alone, an army of Christians will soon be here later in the day to try and bash me cuz lack of tolerance is the Christian way. Oh, and possibly one or two members for the fun of it, who don't have me on iggy. I'm a little caustic and antagonizing, I don't play well with others.
Stick to your faith, Sugar, just don't go shoving it down people's throats or be intolerant of other people's beliefs, which you haven't, and we'll get along just fine. Besides, I love a good debate.

 

[phrodeau]

I think that it is talking spiritually. He raises from the dead and continues to minister until his ascension. We who believe won't be separated from him forever and ever. I am a child of God.

One line has a spiritual interpretation, and the rest are about actual events. I see.

 

[Tryharder62]

If you are a child of God's then maybe you're the Messiah?!
Couldn't find any Historically written texts? Too bad.
No worries, you're not alone, an army of Christians will soon be here later in the day to try and bash me cuz lack of tolerance is the Christian way. Oh, and possibly one or two members for the fun of it, who don't have me on iggy. I'm a little caustic and antagonizing, I don't play well with others.
Stick to your faith, Sugar, just don't go shoving it down people's throats or be intolerant of other people's beliefs, which you haven't, and we'll get along just fine. Besides, I love a good debate.

Reporting on Emperor Nero’s decision to blame the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . . .


I have already given the reason why it is a good thing that I am not the Messiah. I would demand a tiara and force you all to fall at my feet to worship me.

Sugar dumpling, I will not push my faith down anyone's throat. I am not on unrelated threads by Busybody telling him to repent for the day is at hand. I am on a thread about God talking about what I think in debate. Like you, I like these debates.

No bashing by this gal. Actually, glad you are posting.

Oh and today is my day off but I had to take a break to have lunch with my husband. Now I am procrastinating because I don't want to do housework. If I was Messiah I wouldn't have to. LOL

 

[Tryharder62]

One line has a spiritual interpretation, and the rest are about actual events. I see.

It is all very spiritual........

 

[phrodeau]

(edited)

Oh and today is my day off but I had to take a break to have lunch with my husband. Now I am procrastinating because I don't want to do housework. If I was Messiah I wouldn't have to. LOL

https://pics.me.me/theres-no-messiah-in-here-theres-a-mess-all-right-22314712.png

 

[RocketLauncher]

Reporting on Emperor Nero’s decision to blame the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . . .


I have already given the reason why it is a good thing that I am not the Messiah. I would demand a tiara and force you all to fall at my feet to worship me.

Sugar dumpling, I will not push my faith down anyone's throat. I am not on unrelated threads by Busybody telling him to repent for the day is at hand. I am on a thread about God talking about what I think in debate. Like you, I like these debates.

No bashing by this gal. Actually, glad you are posting.

Oh and today is my day off but I had to take a break to have lunch with my husband. Now I am procrastinating because I don't want to do housework. If I was Messiah I wouldn't have to. LOL

Lol, if you were the Messiah I would gladly meet your demands for a tiara and happily worship at your pretty feet.

Tacitus, Roman Politician and Historian, (c. 56-120 CE)
Publius/Gaius Cornelius TacitusTurning next to another stalwart in the anemic apologist arsenal, Tacitus, sufficient reason is uncovered to doubt this Roman author's value in proving an "historical" Jesus. In his Annals, supposedly written around 107 CE, Tacitus purportedly related that the Emperor Nero (37-68) blamed the burning of Rome during his reign on "those people who were abhorred for their crimes and commonly called Christians." Since the fire evidently broke out in the poor quarter where fanatic, agitating Messianic Jews allegedly jumped for joy, thinking the conflagration represented the eschatological development that would bring about the Messianic reign, it would not be unreasonable for authorities to blame the fire on them. However, it is clear that these Messianic Jews were not (yet) called "Christiani." In support of this contention, Nero's famed minister, Seneca (5?-65), whose writings evidently provided much fuel for the incipient Christian ideology, has not a word about these "most-hated" sectarians.

...the Tacitean passage next states that these fire-setting agitators were followers of "Christus" (Christos), who, in the reign of Tiberius, "was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate." The passage also recounts that the Christians, who constituted a "vast multitude at Rome," were then sought after and executed in ghastly manners, including by crucifixion. However, the date that a "vast multitude" of Christians was discovered and executed would be around 64 CE, and it is evident that there was no "vast multitude" of Christians at Rome by this time, as there were not even a multitude of them in Judea. Oddly, this brief mention of Christians is all there is in the voluminous works of Tacitus regarding this extraordinary movement, which allegedly possessed such power as to be able to burn Rome. Also, the Neronian persecution of Christians is unrecorded by any other historian of the day and supposedly took place at the very time when Paul was purportedly freely preaching at Rome (Acts 28:30-31), facts that cast strong doubt on whether or not it actually happened. Drews concludes that the Neronian persecution is likely "nothing but the product of a Christian's imagination in the fifth century." Eusebius, in discussing this persecution, does not avail himself of the Tacitean passage, which he surely would have done had it existed at the time. Eusebius's discussion is very short, indicating he was lacking source material; the passage in Tacitus would have provided him a very valuable resource.

Even conservative writers such as James Still have problems with the authenticity of the Tacitus passage: For one, Tacitus was an imperial writer, and no imperial document would ever refer to Jesus as "Christ." Also, Pilate was not a "procurator" but a prefect, which Tacitus would have known. Nevertheless, not willing to throw out the entire passage, some researchers have concluded that Tacitus "was merely repeating a story told to him by contemporary Christians."

Eusebius of Caesarea, Catholic Church HistorianBased on these and other facts, several scholars have argued that, even if the Annals themselves were genuine, the passage regarding Jesus was spurious. One of these authorities was Rev. Taylor, who suspected the passage to be a forgery because it too is not quoted by any of the Christian fathers, including Tertullian, who read and quoted Tacitus extensively. Nor did Clement of Alexandria notice this passage in any of Tacitus's works, even though one of this Church father's main missions was to scour the works of Pagan writers in order to find validity for Christianity. As noted, the Church historian Eusebius, who likely forged the Testimonium Flavianum, does not relate this Tacitus passage in his abundant writings. Indeed, no mention is made of this passage in any known text prior to the 15th century.

The tone and style of the passage are unlike the writing of Tacitus, and the text "bears a character of exaggeration, and trenches on the laws of rational probability, which the writings of Tacitus are rarely found to do." Taylor further remarks upon the absence in any of Tacitus's other writings of "the least allusion to Christ or Christians." In his well-known Histories, for example, Tacitus never refers to Christ, Christianity or Christians. Furthermore, even the Annals themselves have come under suspicion, as they themselves had never been mentioned by any ancient author....

In any event, even if the Annals were genuine, the pertinent passage itself could easily be an interpolation, based on the abundant precedents and on the fact that the only manuscript was in the possession of one person, de Spire. In reality, "none of the works of Tacitus have come down to us without interpolations."

Regarding Christian desperation for evidence of the existence of Christ, Dupuis comments that true believers are "reduced to look, nearly a hundred years after, for a passage in Tacitus" that does not even provide information other than "the etymology of the word Christian," or they are compelled "to interpolate, by pious fraud, a passage in Josephus." Neither passage, Dupuis concludes, is sufficient to establish the existence of such a remarkable legislator and philosopher, much less a "notorious impostor."

It is evident that Tacitus's remark is nothing more than what is said in the Apostle's Creed—to have the authenticity of the mighty Christian religion rest upon this Pagan author's scanty and likely forged comment is preposterous. Even if the passage in Tacitus were genuine, it would be too late and is not from an eyewitness, such that it is valueless in establishing an "historical" Jesus, representing merely a recital of decades-old Christian tradition.

Pretty sure Jesus had household chores so you're in good company, clearing out temples, making bread and wine can be exhausting.

 

[Tryharder62]

RocketLauncher;89020394]Lol, if you were the Messiah I would gladly meet your demands for a tiara and happily worship at your pretty feet.

Aww thank you.....You would have a lot to worship. Size 11 ladies. Woot Woot! I'll talk to you later about the wand.

Even if the passage in Tacitus were genuine, it would be too late and is not from an eyewitness, such that it is valueless in establishing an "historical" Jesus, representing merely a recital of decades-old Christian tradition.

I am not worried about evidence about Jesus having lived. I think this is funny that you are challenging me to find non-biblical evidence for Jesus, then blast a reference from a historian who wasn't an eye witness. But wait......you won't except the eye witness testimony because it is in the New Testament. It is accepted because of who it was written by EYEWITNESSES.

I think that it is funny you use CE for the years of Tacitus.

An important reason for adopting BCE/CE is religious neutrality. Since the Gregorian calendar has superseded other calendars to become the international standard, members of non-Christian groups may object to the explicitly Christian origins of BC and AD. Particularly problematic is AD (“in the year of our Lord”), and its unavoidable implication that the Lord in question is Jesus Christ.


Whether you change it or not..... There are Christians because there was a man...Jesus Christ.