Can Christians Ever Answer WHY?

[Meriweather]

You said:Context confirms that Isaiah is speaking of the
king of Babylon, not Satan....

Got yourself there, 1) you can't have a double standard whereby the Isaiah verse is a literal historical event you claim is a future prophecy fulfilled by Jesus.
Like your faith's fakacious use of IS53 about plural past tense Israel or Isaiah 9 about King Hezekiah as the son born a sign for his father king Ahaz.
You can't dance back and forth at whim and use claims to validate your messiah then admit that process is bogus without admiting Christianities placement is bogus. (once again throwing Jesus and your faith under the bus to try and be right=ego.
That being said here is my former post on this subject you might learn something from it. Remember itvis your faith that uses IS 14 when refering to Lucifer.
You refute your faith again as well as the dictionary and the reason why they symbolized the morning star for lucifer, all of which prove your last post a lie in claiming you know history.
that description of darkness and spearing event along with Jesus claiming he was Baal's son the morning star-rev22;16
Matches that of the morning stars fall in Isaiah 14:12-17.
The verse Christians use describing Lucifer aka the morning star.
Fact: prophecy has many facits/layers those being
1) the historical description, because the Sages knew to see emulations in behavior, events, and power hungry leaders to predict future probable emulations and resemblances=prophecy.
Sure Isaiah is describing king Nebuchadnezzar, however the admitted emulator Saddam said so himself that he was emulating the Babylonian king trying to bring Babylon to it's amcient glory.
So that is 2) the future emulation prophecy fulfilled because Isaiah14 is also describing Saddams fall, his dishevelled unrecognizable appearance and his being found in a pit. In fact I was the only one to notice and point out that the daye he was found coincided exactly with the verse. Remember in that oart of the world days come before months so 14/12 is the 14th of Dec the day he was captured in his pit.
But prophecy also has a third layer, the spiritual emulation warning, that being the description of the fall of Lucifer Jesus, the image of a msn that Rome created to deceive the world into worshiping Baal and falling for the ole baal harvest seed scam that you see on every single televangelist broadcadt today especially running every show on TBN.

I did not say Isaiah 14 was both a literal historical event AND one fulfilled by Jesus. You said that. I noted that Revelation 22 was a reference to Numbers, not Isaiah.

Second, the Catholic Bible also has the footnote that Isaiah 9 references King Hezekiah's son. Finally, when Isaiah wrote Chapter 53, he was most likely referencing Israel.

As I noted before, the early Christians (Jews) were amazed by the parallels between Jesus' personal life and their history as a people. Some saw their entire history (laid out in past events that actually happened) pointing to Jesus. Telling the story of Jesus was like telling the story of Israel.

Once again, you are arguing with a Catholic over a King James translation that scholars note is a poor interpretation from the original language. Not only that, English as a language has evolved since King James was written, and many words do not retain the same meaning used when King James was written.

No, Rome did not invent Jesus. We saw in my last post that Rome despised Christians and considered both Christ and his followers as wildly superstitious. Christians were persecuted...but survived the persecutions.

 

[Muslim75]

Why could your god not save himself, his apostles, nor his followers?
Why did your god say he had a G0d?
Why would he argue with himself and ask why did he forsake himself? Split personality?
Why could he not deliver on his promises?
Why would your god choose to heal only a few followers instead of all?
Why does your god have handicap parking spaces at his churches if he did come to heal all?
Why does your god have cemetaries and hospitals in his name?
Why does your god try to convert Jews away from YHWH if he is one in the same and why does he switch names and birthdates and eras to suit your stories?
Why would your god say he was the nemesis of the hebrew God (Rev 22;16) if they are the same?
Why would your god say he was Lucifer the one placed higher then G0d?
Why can't Priests/Pastors/Followers answer the most basic question:
Who is the historical christ you are calling Jesus? So simple yet 1 out of a hundred ever answer it.

People value things differently, that is why there is so many religions. But logic is one and can not be owned by anyone. Logic is that there is a truth somewhere in between the 3 major monotheistic religions. Then logic wants that the religion that comes last out of these three is the true religion. That religion is Islam.

Only one religion can be true. Following a religion other than Islam is absolutely illogical.

 

[Meriweather]

Meri,
noticed a source you used from a later era historian.
Christus (christos) was Krishna's name (some of his myth was used for Jesus) Jesus name was not Christ and h8s cult was called Hanotzrim and Nazarene.
Therefore when you quoted the historian
" Christus, from whom the name had its
origin"
this reveals it can't be Jesus and has to be Krishna.
There were many christs including Krishna and Mithra, so Christian is a blanket term hence why I ask which Christ is your Jesus, even Janes and Paul were at odds at each other for this very same issue. They swore each was teaching another christ then they were.

Christ comes from the Greek Christos which is an interpretation of the Hebrew word for Messiah. Krishna, of course, comes from the Sanskirt, "kalka." Nor was Krishna put to death by Pilate. Once again you are taking two unique individuals and insisting their similarities make them the same person even though they lived thousands of years (not to mention thousands of miles) apart.

James and Paul were centered on the same person--Christ crucified by Pontius Pilate. Some say that James and Paul disagreed on faith and works. Others say that James was simply correcting and clarifying some people's misinterpretations (or perhaps criticisms) of what Paul actually said.

 

[Meriweather]

Meri said: Jesus speaks of Satan as a murderer from the
beginning, the overseer of demons.

Any Jewish teacher at that time period would consider Rome the adversary (sawtawn=satan).
Rome was a murdering culture from it's begining, however Rome can't teach you about who is satan anymore then Saddam can call the US the great satan.
Jesus being Romes created image means his placed word is useless on this subject, so Who does Michael say is Satan?

pssst infancy book of thomas shows a young Jesus murdering a kid out of childish pride, sort of like how you keep killing Jesus by throwing him under the bus to try and save an argument. Murderer since the beginning fits the shoes right there.

First, the Gospel of Thomas was written between four to six generations after Christ died (and long after the Gospels we use today) by an admire of James who thought James was the better person.

Your take on sawtawn is quite interesting, especially in light of Jesus' accusation that while his Father is God, there were some (at that time) whose father was Satan. I'll have to do more research on this, and I thank you for the lead.

 

[Faun]

And you came to that SUBJECTIVE OPINION based on not knowing, which is not how you rationalize and deduce things. BUT you inadvertantly revealed your intent, because if you don't want the answer then why did you ask? Your intent was not the claim to seeking an answer, your intent was to muddy the waters so nobody could drink from them because you didn't want to you felt you would make sure others wouldn't either.

My initial query was rhetorical in nature. Actually, it was a test. A test to determine if you could fathom the distiction between coincidence and delusion. Once you answered that question for me, there was no need for me to query further or play your silly games of deciphering your "clues."

 

[Meriweather]

People value things differently, that is why there is so many religions. But logic is one and can not be owned by anyone. Logic is that there is a truth somewhere in between the 3 major monotheistic religions. Then logic wants that the religion that comes last out of these three is the true religion. That religion is Islam.

Only one religion can be true. Following a religion other than Islam is absolutely illogical.

I disagree only one religion can be true. The purpose of religion is to draw one closer to God: to love God and to love one's fellowman. In Judaism I see Moses presenting the Law to teach people how to love God and one another. The Law drew people closer to loving God and each other.

Jesus presented a slightly different take on this basic idea: Instead of starting with the Law, Jesus started with the idea of love: Love God and ones fellowman and this will result in them keeping God's law. We have two basic paths:

1. Keep the Law and meet/love God.
2. Love God and keep the Law.

I do not know/remember much about Islam. It's been a long time since I studied it. However, how it came across to me was a man who was using the great religions for his own expediency and his own purposes. It had nothing new to offer. Further, whereas both Israel and Jesus/his disciples are depicted as servants--and suffering servants at that--Islams seems to see itself not as a servant but as a conqueror.

If you believe Islam is about loving God and ones fellowman, of serving God and ones fellowman, then it may not be far from the foundation of Judaism and Christianity. However, if you believe Islam (the later religion) was meant to conquer and subdue (as opposed to serving and loving), then logic tells us Islam is not based on the same basic truth as Christianity and Judaism.

 

[teddyearp]

Are you asking me these questions?
First one must understand Genesis for what it says and not what we are lead to believe about Genesis<snip>

Yes, I was asking you those questions. First one must understand the whole of all the scriptures and not focus on any one book to get to the meat of the matter. The fact that you thought I was talking about Genesis shows me that you are not quite qualified to ask nor answer the questions you posed in your OP. And honestly one has to have the gift of the spirit to be able to properly interpret the whole of the scriptures, IMHO.

Hint: the questions I asked you were quotes from another book of the bible, all up to the very last one. I'll leave you to find where as no one else here has so far. But it has helped me reconcile the finite to the infinite.

But again, if you open your intelligence and your mind, at least for me, there is no way we can fully reconcile our finite mind to God's infinite mind. We have a time line. We start and we end. God does not. He can see time as a linear thing and/or all at once. At the same time. Get it? Probably not, since it is too hard for me to wrap my mind around. But the answer is somewhere in there.

good luck

 

[HaShev]

Teddy,
Genesis is required to properly understand the rest.
Discussing the WHOLE bible in a post is an obsurd expectation by you, be sensable.
The phrase is called non linear time and thus Isaiah hints
the begining is at the end (also plagiarized in NT). What starts at the end seems to be existant ftom begining of time yet starts at the end of linear time and beging of non linear time. This is how one can be the first and last and everafter, a phrase stolen from Zoroaster plagiarized by Christianity without defining how it was possible.
What you call difficult is actually easy when you define everything as intended, obey the rules of usage and not be thwarted by what was taught by those who knew not Hebrew or the Torah. In other words the more we stray the less we keep straight the message untill we lose site of the what, where, why and how.
What is it: a message from the time to come(future) to
the past.
Why: to bring order out of the chaos, straighten our oath to a better quicker more successful future in tikkun olam.
Where: time to come=advanced future where non linear time is possible. You dont get that if you are taught heaven exists in death up in clouds and is already there with no effort in creating it.
How?: self explanitory already discussed.

 

[teddyearp]

HaShev, sure you have some good points, but it seems as though your biblical knowledge is totally from an esoteric or even secular bent. Not at all a spiritual one.

Why have you not answered the questions I asked? Let me dumb it down for you.

Let me start with asking you from where my questions came.

If you cannot answer the latter nor the former, then really you have not enough knowledge IMHO for me to attempt to continue with you. Why? Because you are lost in the shuffle. I shuffle with the lost.

 

[HaShev]

TEDDY ,
I can't answer your question because I don't curse and we know where you pulled your question from.
*Iggied for being rude and lying
about not answering you *

 

[teddyearp]

Huhh? What would be cursing about answering the questions I asked. And if "we know where you pulled your question from", well that is not what I asked of you. I asked you directly to answer where I pulled them from, not for a deflection.

So. Again.

Where did my questions come from? Or are you waiting until the subject of my questions are so watered down as to make yourself look like you won?

 

[HaShev]

Meri sorry my reply got eaten up by my browsers compression proxy, you would have enjoyed it, but that's ok I forgot to respond to this important subject snyway.
Christ crucified by Pontius Pilate you said.
Is there historical records dating Pilate besides the NT?
Because Neither The Galilean christ nor Yeshu son of Mary ever lived in the Ad era of Pilates proposed time period. The son of Mary wasn't even crucified and lived 100 years before Pilate.
So your Pilate and James christ=Theudas
the followers died martyrs, most likely taught about son of man to come, they would not be called christians a non Hebrew term, the only one Christians can be named after is Christos=Krishna. Did Pilate exist outside the self testimonies?

 

[Meriweather]

Meri sorry my reply got eaten up by my browsers compression proxy, you would have enjoyed it, but that's ok I forgot to respond to this important subject snyway.
Christ crucified by Pontius Pilate you said.
Is there historical records dating Pilate besides the NT?
Because Neither The Galilean christ nor Yeshu son of Mary ever lived in the Ad era of Pilates proposed time period. The son of Mary wasn't even crucified and lived 100 years before Pilate.

Yes, the Roman historian Tacitus (56-117) notes that Christus was put to death by Pontius Pilate. This is why I say Jesus was a unique person in his own right--he was not another Yeshuah, and he was not Theudas. While the comment by Josephus was largely expanded upon, many scholars believe this Jesus was mentioned by Josephus, but without the embroidery--i.e., simply Jesus, who was crucified by Pilate... Josephus also mentions James, "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ" is considered authentic.

 

[HaShev]

Maybe 3rd times a charm, I said only Krishna was named Christos, you said this meant anointed yet manage to forget the son of perdition christians label Lucifer in Ezekiel 28:14-15 is called
Anointed (christ) Cherub(guardian in Hebrew in Nazarei)
who's deemed perfect (sinless) until we find the iniquities in his whitewashed image.
So how come Christians conveniently forget the meaning of words and suddenly forget how to place Jesus in scripture SELECTIVELY CHOSING WHAT TO IGNORE THAT ACTUALLY MATCHES HIM AND ONLY HIM AS LUCIFER?
Fact: you say NT isn't plagiarizing the OT, that it's only coincidences of similarities yet turn around and validate or place Jesus in the OT by such falacious means and selective recognition of coincidences and similarities. In other words you recognize the problem of selective recognition yet turn around and avoid it when convenient to be dishonest with yourself as well as others. According to your own reply and arguments you are saying Jesus isn't the fulfillment of prophecy, he's merely a selective recognition of coincidental similarities.
That said, a Rabbi showed that a rooster fulfilled more verses on messiah then Jesus did. That means a mere rooster>Jesus.
And the rooster wasn't made an idol god which caused thousands of wars and over 50 million murders.
The rooster never fufilled verses on Lucifer neother did he claim to be Lucifer.

Now back to your post: how can Josephus be authentic if he was a Jew and would never use the word christ?
Only a christian would use that term instead of Moshiach.

 

[Meriweather]

Maybe 3rd times a charm, I said only Krishna was named Christos, you said this meant anointed yet manage to forget the son of perdition christians label Lucifer in Ezekiel 28:14-15 is called
Anointed (christ) Cherub(guardian in Hebrew in Nazarei)
who's deemed perfect (sinless) until we find the iniquities in his whitewashed image.
So how come Christians conveniently forget the meaning of words and suddenly forget how to place Jesus in scripture SELECTIVELY CHOSING WHAT TO IGNORE THAT ACTUALLY MATCHES HIM AND ONLY HIM AS LUCIFER?
Fact: you say NT isn't plagiarizing the OT, that it's only coincidences of similarities yet turn around and validate or place Jesus in the OT by such falacious means and selective recognition of coincidences and similarities. In other words you recognize the problem of selective recognition yet turn around and avoid it when convenient to be dishonest with yourself as well as others. According to your own reply and arguments you are saying Jesus isn't the fulfillment of prophecy, he's merely a selective recognition of coincidental similarities.
That said, a Rabbi showed that a rooster fulfilled more verses on messiah then Jesus did. That means a mere rooster>Jesus.
And the rooster wasn't made an idol god which caused thousands of wars and over 50 million murders.
The rooster never fufilled verses on Lucifer neother did he claim to be Lucifer.

Now back to your post: how can Josephus be authentic if he was a Jew and would never use the word christ?
Only a christian would use that term instead of Moshiach.

I pointed out Christos is the Greek word for the Hebrew word Messiah. Christians consider Christ the anointed Messiah. Jews do not believe Jesus is the anointed Messiah. Both Jews and Christians use the word anointed for things other than "Messiah." One can be an anointed prophet or Apostle or priest, for example.

I said Krishna came from a Sanskrit word, "kalka" which has the connotation of raising people out of filth.

I never mentioned Ezekiel, and as I have said before, the Catholic Bible (nor the Hebrew Bible) mentions Lucifer. You are reading the King James Bible, which I will say again is not a scholarly translation. Futher, I am Catholic, not Protestant, so Lucifer in the Bible means A BAD TRANSLATION of whatever the scripture actually said. In other words, Lucifer has ZILCH meaning to me when it comes to scripture.

The New Testament does not plagiarize. Plagiarize means someone who has copied an identical story and claims it as their own. The New Testament is a completely different story about completely different people. The story of Jesus' life, as told in the New Testament shows an amazing (you say coincidental) similarity to the history of Israel.

What I recommend is that people tell the story of their religion, and allow others to tell the story of theirs. When people attempt to explain a religion that is not their own, most of the time they make a hash of it.

 

[Faun]

Maybe 3rd times a charm, I said only Krishna was named Christos, you said this meant anointed yet manage to forget the son of perdition christians label Lucifer in Ezekiel 28:14-15 is called
Anointed (christ) Cherub(guardian in Hebrew in Nazarei)
who's deemed perfect (sinless) until we find the iniquities in his whitewashed image.
So how come Christians conveniently forget the meaning of words and suddenly forget how to place Jesus in scripture SELECTIVELY CHOSING WHAT TO IGNORE THAT ACTUALLY MATCHES HIM AND ONLY HIM AS LUCIFER?
Fact: you say NT isn't plagiarizing the OT, that it's only coincidences of similarities yet turn around and validate or place Jesus in the OT by such falacious means and selective recognition of coincidences and similarities. In other words you recognize the problem of selective recognition yet turn around and avoid it when convenient to be dishonest with yourself as well as others. According to your own reply and arguments you are saying Jesus isn't the fulfillment of prophecy, he's merely a selective recognition of coincidental similarities.
That said, a Rabbi showed that a rooster fulfilled more verses on messiah then Jesus did. That means a mere rooster>Jesus.
And the rooster wasn't made an idol god which caused thousands of wars and over 50 million murders.
The rooster never fufilled verses on Lucifer neother did he claim to be Lucifer.

Now back to your post: how can Josephus be authentic if he was a Jew and would never use the word christ?
Only a christian would use that term instead of Moshiach.

There is nothing but boneheaded conjecture to match Jesus as Lucifer.

 

[hortysir]

SEE YOU ARE calling them suicidal. But we know these are lame excuses.
One can give themselves and not cause harm to ones friends in doing so. If one has power to save himself and friends and dies not then that power is bogus and claims insane.
1)you'd be claiming David Koresh and Jim Jones followers gave of themselves instead of being lead to death by a delusional and forbidden by the rules warned not to listen to. So not only did Jesus go down a cursed death for breaking the rules and warnings, but so too was his followers cursed along side him.
2) the martyred apostles is from the accounts of Theudas the ad christ figure in your trinity of christs making up the image Jesus. So is Theudas your Jesus then?
This is whrre you avoid telling us who your christ is- pkead the fifth like the rest.
3) God says Moshiach can't quit nor fail, love means providing what you claim you can not teasing people and giving nothing you claim uou can and will.
Lucifer is such a tease that way.

Delta, you just exposed a flaw in the xtian logic.
The Hebrew God is not a msn nor form and being in 2 lsyers of existance is still a form and a ghost and kingdom in heaven still has a form and place in snother time dimension therefore it can't be the same Teaching of God and furthermore they'd still exist with the same name and not change that name including the foolish JW and Adventist and some coptics who say Jesus is Michael. Michael must be Michael for prophecy to be true and not jim joe or jesus, Yhwh can't come as Jim Jones, David Koresh or Jesus.
Existing in 1 or 2 or several layers or another planet they all still keep their name and have a further process in creating them thus all have a creator thus can't be the most finite source and power in life.
If I'm wrong he can strike me dead before the next sentence.







Well looks like I was right, he has no power except that in the pen of men who wrote the stories and their little fishies that bought it hook line and sinker.

Then you already have the answers you want.

No answers given to you will be sufficient

 

[HaShev]

faun said:"There is nothing but boneheaded conjecture to
match Jesus as Lucifer"

Well you shouldn't use the word bonehead when you make such a mistaken statement, it just makes you look worse and silly. *L*
Reason being is nobody but Jesus can be deemed Lucifer in Ezekiel 28 because he's the only prophet deemed perfect and none called christ (anointed)nazarene(cherub)
add to the fact it says he falls to the pit by the hands of the seas (rome) for claiming to be a god and we have a winner. Acts 2:27, 1 peter 3:19, and apostles creed Jesus falls to the pit aka perdition=son of perdition.
Where you throw Jesus under the bus and look silly is the fact this standard is Christian standards in validating and placing Jesus as messish, so when you denounce your standard as bonehead you instantly remove Jesus as Messiah and call all Christians boneheads and if Jesus isn't messiah then that makes him the imposter deceiver lucifer which he admited being in Rev 22:16.

What part of check mate don't uou people understand, you placed your own king into a corner so don't blame me for your suicide king move.

 

[HaShev]

Meri,
so you admit knowing what the word anointed translates to so what's your excuse with Ezekiel 28 only selectively placing Jesus in scripture whereby you admitted they do often falaciously, but chose to change that standard everytimevit reveals Jesus fulfills Lucifer prophecy.

Furthermore what partvof check mate do you not understand? You lost your own argument but never apologised, instead you willingly continuedcto deceive people contradicting yourself and being a hypocrit.
You can't even be honest with yourself let alone others.
Don't blame me because itcwas you who pointed out your own errors in thinking, I just reminded uou to look at what you say and reflect it back yo your own beliefs and reasoning.

 

[HaShev]

SEE YOU ARE calling them suicidal. But we know these are lame excuses.
One can give themselves and not cause harm to ones friends in doing so. If one has power to save himself and friends and dies not then that power is bogus and claims insane.
1)you'd be claiming David Koresh and Jim Jones followers gave of themselves instead of being lead to death by a delusional and forbidden by the rules warned not to listen to. So not only did Jesus go down a cursed death for breaking the rules and warnings, but so too was his followers cursed along side him.
2) the martyred apostles is from the accounts of Theudas the ad christ figure in your trinity of christs making up the image Jesus. So is Theudas your Jesus then?
This is whrre you avoid telling us who your christ is- pkead the fifth like the rest.
3) God says Moshiach can't quit nor fail, love means providing what you claim you can not teasing people and giving nothing you claim uou can and will.
Lucifer is such a tease that way.

Delta, you just exposed a flaw in the xtian logic.
The Hebrew God is not a msn nor form and being in 2 lsyers of existance is still a form and a ghost and kingdom in heaven still has a form and place in snother time dimension therefore it can't be the same Teaching of God and furthermore they'd still exist with the same name and not change that name including the foolish JW and Adventist and some coptics who say Jesus is Michael. Michael must be Michael for prophecy to be true and not jim joe or jesus, Yhwh can't come as Jim Jones, David Koresh or Jesus.
Existing in 1 or 2 or several layers or another planet they all still keep their name and have a further process in creating them thus all have a creator thus can't be the most finite source and power in life.
If I'm wrong he can strike me dead before the next sentence.







Well looks like I was right, he has no power except that in the pen of men who wrote the stories and their little fishies that bought it hook line and sinker.

Then you already have the answers you want.

No answers given to you will be sufficient

Only because I know something, and that's besides the obvious stuff people miss hrough heir programed devotion and affiliation pride.
It's not being pompous or arrogant.
It would be like you being involved in a secret technology program, you couldn't share info but you have to listen to stasist rant about how that technology is silly sci-fi and you'd be delusional to think it could work.
Would that make you pompous or them?
It's all subjective based on what ones knows.
Or thinks they know.