Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Christian belief is that Jesus has two natures: A human nature and a divine nature. Jesus constantly referred to himself as the "Son of man" emphasizing his human nature as well as his divine nature (One with God).I thought Christians believe he was the son of Gd. Why else would you worship a human being?
It was more or less when a name was given to the first sin of mankind. Kind of like the name 'Trinity' was put into use so people would understand only One God, not three.
Easy mistake.He waaaaaas? I thought he was on the adjacent cross.
Sounds like a fine idea. Might make things more confusing. For example, Catholic and Orthodox always include an Old Testament reading in their ceremonies. I know one minister who never does because his belief is that the New Testament includes everything a Christian needs to learn. Different non-Catholic denominations have different takes on this.It would be a great thread on its own: how is Catholicism different from Protestantism? Maybe I’ll start it later.
Sounds like a fine idea. Might make things more confusing. For example, Catholic and Orthodox always include an Old Testament reading in their ceremonies. I know one minister who never does because his belief is that the New Testament includes everything a Christian needs to learn. Different non-Catholic denominations have different takes on this.
Nope. He rose from the dead and is alive.Would you settle for “was” a human being?
Because He's also God.I know more than I’d like.
Then answer the question: you just said Jesus was human? Why worship a human?
But not the scripture that notes the sins of the father can effect descendants down to the fourth generation. Genesis' description of that first sin falls into the category of a Just So story. It attempts to explain why humans often fail at pursuing what is good spiritually and instead pursue the treasures of this life. Call it Original Sin or call it nothing, the lesson remains in Genesis. I don't know about other Christian faiths, but early on in Catholic school we were taught Adam and Eve represented all of us. The question presented: Do you want to know what is good and what is bad--or do you only want to know what is good?Neither Jews nor Muslims believe in original sin... and in fact the concept contradicts scripture like sins of the father.
There are 5 verses that contradict each other on inherited sin.But not the scripture that notes the sins of the father can effect descendants down to the fourth generation. Genesis' description of that first sin falls into the category of a Just So story. It attempts to explain why humans often fail at pursuing what is good spiritually and instead pursue the treasures of this life. Call it Original Sin or call it nothing, the lesson remains in Genesis. I don't know about other Christian faiths, but early on in Catholic school we were taught Adam and Eve represented all of us. The question presented: Do you want to know what is good and what is bad--or do you only want to know what is good?
Even as elementary school kids it made sense that we should know about evil so we could choose to avoid it. Also, because both good and evil do exist we should learn the differences between good and evil. As the saying goes, Knowledge is power.
You mean his spirit is alive? Or alive physically? If the latter, where does he live?Nope. He rose from the dead and is alive.
Of that particular minister? If I ever knew, I've forgotten its name. However, he may have been one of the Pentecostal denominations, but which one, I don't recall. Remember many Christian denominations have churches that select their own readings/liturgy.What church?
Yes. Context is important. One is pretty clear that if a living father is found guilty of something, the children are not punished--and if the children are found guilty of a wrong-doing the parent is not punished.There are 5 verses that contradict each other on inherited sin.
Physically and spiritually, totally alive in every way. He's in Heaven physically. He can pretty much appear wherever and whenever he wants. He's God.You mean his spirit is alive? Or alive physically? If the latter, where does he live?
It seems to me a very common misapprehension---not only among christian 'scholars' ---wow...that shows real ignorance about Judaism. Not only is there no direct scriptural evidence of two messiahs, the idea that there might be two is a rabbinic interpretation. But once you are relying on the rabbinic ideas then you should give credence to what the rabbis actually say (such as R. Saadia Gaon who explains that the appearance of the Ben Joseph figure is not a sure thing, or the rabbinic explanation that the two figures follow one immediately after the other so any gap of, say 2000+ years is not part of it). So are you actually saying that you subscribe to the rabbinic teachings now? Because they teach all sorts of things you might not like. Or do you just attach yourself to isolated rabbinic ideas if you happen to like them?
Show me Muhammad in OT Scripture.It seems to me a very common misapprehension---not only among christian 'scholars' ---
but muslim 'scholars' too----that verses out of the talmud and even the mishneh are
FROM HEAVEN
All true, but IMO it takes away choice..as if it's destiny. Bad theology.Yes. Context is important. One is pretty clear that if a living father is found guilty of something, the children are not punished--and if the children are found guilty of a wrong-doing the parent is not punished.
Another context is what parents do can have a lasting effect for generations. I have noted this in my own family.
It doesn't take away choice as much as an ancestor can change choices available. For example, a father in prison, and children being raised by a single mom presents different choices from children being raised in a loving, mostly well-to-do family.All true, but IMO it takes away choice..as if it's destiny. Bad theology.
The scriptures I have are all the Gospels, but John in particular.
Every Old Testament Judge and King was a messiah, meaning an anointed one. Therefore, there have been many messiahs in Judaism. Note that in Judaism, first the Judges then the Kings were the ones in charge of worldly affairs. Therefore, when Jews lost to other nations and did not have an anointed Jewish king, they looked for their next Messiah (anointed king). It never occurred to them to look for a priest, prophet, or spiritual leader because these remained in Jewish culture.
According to the Gospels, people still acknowledged prophets in Jesus' day. However, after the advent of Christianity, Jewish Canon says that Malachi was the last Jewish prophet. I disagree with that on the basis that John the Baptist and Jesus both qualified as prophets. Remember Levites asking John-the-Baptist, "Are you The Prophet?"
There is so much we don't know and I have never been able to learn much about The Prophet. It seems that Moses spoke of him, as someone greater than he. Moses was known for teaching the Law to the Israelites, and Jesus is also known for teaching about the Law.
My point is that Messiah meant 'anointed' and Jesus was clearly anointed by God (Christian belief) to proclaim the Good News and to teach Repentance for the forgiveness of sins. However 'Messiah' also meant a world political ruler, and this is clearly what Jews meant when speaking of "The Messiah."
I do not believe that Moses foretold of someone in the Line of David because Moses was not only before David's time, he lived before the time of Kings. I believe Moses spoke not of a ruler but of The Prophet (meaning one who speaks for God) who would be greater than he. A prophet is someone to whom Moses could relate, someone who knew God spoke for Him. Jesus insisted this is what he was doing--speaking and acting as God directed him. He insisted he was One with God.
While there is nothing wrong in asking for a single verse or two, there is nothing particularly strong about using proof-texting. It usually lifts that specific verse out of context and it ignores all the verses. Another thing it does: Causes comments such as, "Sounds like work-based salvation..." which makes your own denominations sound like lazy do-nothings when it comes to serving God and our fellow-man. Scripture is clear: There is no such thing as work-based salvation is equally clear that we are to discern the will of God and serve Him--and we are to help our fellow-man.
All that being said...Paul used proof-texting of the Old Testament quite a lot himself--and I do not agree with all his 'proof-texts' either. Just because Paul used them does not turn them into something stronger than the original author(s) of those verses intended. They serve as analogies, and at some point analogies always fail. Not that analogies and proof-texts are useless, they are not, but we should always note the point at which they fail, too.
Ok, that’s about what I’d expected you to believe, and how you would answer. Have a good day.Physically and spiritually, totally alive in every way. He's in Heaven physically. He can pretty much appear wherever and whenever he wants. He's God.
Sigh. It is not being "intellectual". I am merely sharing what I have learned in studies about the Messiah and the use of the word.I'm tired of this type of conversation that is very unclear and trying to be intellectual, I prefer plain speaking, and talking about things that actually matter. I really don't care about judges and earthly kings, so I'll let you talk about that with someone else.
