The Bible Tells Us When Jesus Returns - Between Tisha B'Av and Day of Atonement 2029

[Parture]

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

This is you.

So either you believe and are saved or you doith good and are saved. Which is it?

Salvation is not by works lest anyone should boast.

So why mention works? You have contradicted thyself.

Works are unto rewards for believers, not for initial salvation.

Initial salvation? You don't even know what you're babbling about. If works were irrelevant to salvation it wouldn't be mentioned.

Works are mentioned unto rewards not for initial salvation.

 

[Parture]

Why do you come up with the conclusion that an eternal god created the Cosmos? Why can't the cosmos be eternal? Just take god out of the equation. No need for one. We know how and when the big bang started. We may have come out of a black hole. Inside a black hole is another universe, and so on and so on. Did you see the Cosmos yet? There are billions of suns in our galaxy. There are billions of galaxies in our observable universe. There might be an infinate number of universes.
What do you know? Of the 13.5 billion years of our universe, we've only been aware for 40,000 years. We've only begun to know who we are and were we are in the universe. We'd have known 2000 years earlier if not for superstition, religions, gods, churches, super natural thinking, mysticism.

I already said why. If the cosmos has an infinite regress of cause and effects, then you would have had an eternity to come into being before now, so by that definition, you would have already happened. Therefore, nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated. This uncreated Creator is whom we call God.

Even if there was an infinite regress of infinite universes, the same problem occurs, because you would have had an eternity to come into being before now, so you should have already happened.

The universe is 13.8 billion years old (Gen. 1.1). Man has only been God-conscious since 4004 BC (Gen. 1.26), not 40,000 years. God breathed in the breath of life, directly creating man's spirit, and when it made contact with the body of Pre-Endemic, Pre-Adamic men (who cease to exist), many became a living soul with both a body and a spirit.

You haven't given a good reason for Jesus to enter His creation later than He did. I think it was the perfect time under Roman persecution. I am glad these past many centuries were after the cross to show mankind the glory of His Church. If Christianity did not exist, mankind would have destroyed itself long ago. It is the restraining power of the Holy Spirit that keeps things in check.

 

[emilynghiem]

No there are many Jews who receive understanding of Christ Jesus
and accept Salvation. Peter Loth, his friend who do spiritual healing
ministry in Houston Irvin and Olivia Reiner, and our friend Juda Myer
and others are Jews who have received Christ Jesus as completing and fulfilling the laws.

Jews are not excluded.

Only people who cannot forgive and block the process
are excluding themselves from spiritual healing and heavenly peace
in the Kingdom of God as one with all others joined in Christ or by perfect Conscience.

Christians who cannot forgive
Jews who cannot forgive
Muslims or Atheists or Buddhist who cannot forgive

The key is to what degree we forgive.
The more we forgive the more u nified we become with all other
people as children of God, as one humanity.

Our affiliations and tribe is part of our identity
and how we organize, but forgiveness and fear
is what causes us to either be divided against ourselves
or united as one regardless of our tribal affiliations.

Understand why you are not a Christian. If you claim nobody is going to Hell forever, you are not a Christian, because that is part of the gospel. If you reject Jesus is the 2nd Person of the Trinity, you are not a Christian, so you are going to Hell. Jesus said unless you confess who He truly is, He will deny you be fore the Father in Heaven (Matt. 10.32,33). If you reject Jesus resurrected Himself the 3rd day, you are not a Christian, for that is part of the gospel. If you believe most people are saved, you are not a Christian, because that is not the "little flock" (Luke 12.32). If you reject the Jesus who returns to reign on earth over the nations for 1000 years with his Overcomers in the 3rd Temple, you are not a Christian, for this is His second coming. If you believe there are more than 66 books to God's word, you are not Christian as per Rev. 22.18,19.

Where are you getting that I am rejecting anything especially Jesus in the Trinity?

I believe that God/Christ Jesus/and the Holy Spirit are universal for all humanity.

I don't deny any of this, where are you getting these fearful accusations?

Understand why you are not a Christian. If you reject Jesus existed before time and space Who created all things, you are not a Christian. If you claim nobody is going to Hell forever, you are not a Christian, because that is part of the gospel. If you reject Jesus is the 2nd Person of the Trinity, you are not a Christian, so you are going to Hell. Jesus said unless you confess who He truly is, He will deny you be fore the Father in Heaven (Matt. 10.32,33). If you reject Jesus resurrected Himself the 3rd day, you are not a Christian, for that is part of the gospel. If you believe most people are saved, you are not a Christian, because that is not the "little flock" (Luke 12.32). If you reject the Jesus who returns to reign on earth over the nations for 1000 years with his Overcomers in the 3rd Temple, you are not a Christian, for this is His second coming. If you believe there are more than 66 books to God's word, you are not Christian as per Rev. 22.18,19

I didn't say "most people are saved"
Most people LIKE YOU can't forgive so that blocks full entrance into heaven.

the path of destruction is broad with people
LIKE YOU saying I am right you are wrong

the gate of righteousness is narrow where people agree in Christ

So first we form agreements in Christ
then we correct all the issues and remove the unforgiveness
and then all people who receive this understanding
this forgiveness and correction in Christ join in Salvation

I would AGREE with you that most people are
at war and in conflict stuck in unforgiveness and
repeated cycles of hell

Just because most people go through this
doesn't mean Christ cannot save all people through forgiveness
when we get tired of putting each other through hell!

People are so designed to be self-serving
they WANT To be free from suffering and WANT freedom and peace

So by the very free will, conscience and reason God gave us
where the right choices lead to peace and satisfaction
with the wrong choices lead to pain and suffering
EVENTUALLY people discover forgiveness and healing and choose that instead

When they are tired of going through hell

My forgiving another person has nothing to do with saving them. You're confused. You're a universalist, but the Bible does not teach universalism.

Correct Parture now we're getting somewhere

1. Your willingness to forgive has to do with YOUR Salvation not the other person who has to decide to forgive for their own sake

2. You don't save anyone.
We receive saving Grace from God.
And a major step in that is to
Forgive one another or ask help
with forgiveness

So we teach forgiveness so that we can restore relations by establishing truth that sets us free

 

[Parture]

Understand why you are not a Christian. If you claim nobody is going to Hell forever, you are not a Christian, because that is part of the gospel. If you reject Jesus is the 2nd Person of the Trinity, you are not a Christian, so you are going to Hell. Jesus said unless you confess who He truly is, He will deny you be fore the Father in Heaven (Matt. 10.32,33). If you reject Jesus resurrected Himself the 3rd day, you are not a Christian, for that is part of the gospel. If you believe most people are saved, you are not a Christian, because that is not the "little flock" (Luke 12.32). If you reject the Jesus who returns to reign on earth over the nations for 1000 years with his Overcomers in the 3rd Temple, you are not a Christian, for this is His second coming. If you believe there are more than 66 books to God's word, you are not Christian as per Rev. 22.18,19.

Where are you getting that I am rejecting anything especially Jesus in the Trinity?

I believe that God/Christ Jesus/and the Holy Spirit are universal for all humanity.

I don't deny any of this, where are you getting these fearful accusations?

Understand why you are not a Christian. If you reject Jesus existed before time and space Who created all things, you are not a Christian. If you claim nobody is going to Hell forever, you are not a Christian, because that is part of the gospel. If you reject Jesus is the 2nd Person of the Trinity, you are not a Christian, so you are going to Hell. Jesus said unless you confess who He truly is, He will deny you be fore the Father in Heaven (Matt. 10.32,33). If you reject Jesus resurrected Himself the 3rd day, you are not a Christian, for that is part of the gospel. If you believe most people are saved, you are not a Christian, because that is not the "little flock" (Luke 12.32). If you reject the Jesus who returns to reign on earth over the nations for 1000 years with his Overcomers in the 3rd Temple, you are not a Christian, for this is His second coming. If you believe there are more than 66 books to God's word, you are not Christian as per Rev. 22.18,19

I didn't say "most people are saved"
Most people LIKE YOU can't forgive so that blocks full entrance into heaven.

the path of destruction is broad with people
LIKE YOU saying I am right you are wrong

the gate of righteousness is narrow where people agree in Christ

So first we form agreements in Christ
then we correct all the issues and remove the unforgiveness
and then all people who receive this understanding
this forgiveness and correction in Christ join in Salvation

I would AGREE with you that most people are
at war and in conflict stuck in unforgiveness and
repeated cycles of hell

Just because most people go through this
doesn't mean Christ cannot save all people through forgiveness
when we get tired of putting each other through hell!

People are so designed to be self-serving
they WANT To be free from suffering and WANT freedom and peace

So by the very free will, conscience and reason God gave us
where the right choices lead to peace and satisfaction
with the wrong choices lead to pain and suffering
EVENTUALLY people discover forgiveness and healing and choose that instead

When they are tired of going through hell

My forgiving another person has nothing to do with saving them. You're confused. You're a universalist, but the Bible does not teach universalism.

Correct Parture now we're getting somewhere

1. Your willingness to forgive has to do with YOUR Salvation not the other person who has to decide to forgive for their own sake

2. You don't save anyone.
We receive saving Grace from God.
And a major step in that is to
Forgive one another or ask help
with forgiveness

So we teach forgiveness so that we can restore relations by establishing truth that sets us free

Of course Christians forgive, but we are not universalists. We do not believe everyone gets saved.

 

[Parture]

I am concerned about your salvation so let's see where you stand,

Atonement and Co-Crucifixion:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

1. Have you come to the cross as a helpless sinner to receive the Lord Jesus as Savior (substitution) and died with Him (identification) (Gal. 2.19,20; Rom. 6.6-8, 7.4; Gal. 2.20)?

Trinity:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

2. Do you believe God is Triune (Gen. 3.22), the Trinity of the Father, Son and Spirit (Matt. 3.16-17, Mark 1.9-11, Luke 3.21-22) and created "all things by Him [Jesus]" (John 1.3)?

Distinction of God's 3 Persons:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

3. Do you believe the Godhead is One Being of one substance in three Persons, co-equal, co-eternal and co-inherent, each having their own distinct will (John 6.38, Luke 22.42) but not separate?

Premillennial and Rewards:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

4. The Son of Man, Christ Jesus, will return with His overcomer believers to reign with a "rod of iron" (Rev. 2.27, 12.5, 19.15) "over the nations" (2.26) for 1000 years.

God Foreknows Our Free-Choice:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

5. God provides us all sufficient grace to have the free-choice, pleading "come unto me" (Matt. 11.28) "if any...whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely" (John 7.37, Rev. 22.17).

Physical New City and New Earth:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

6. After the millennial kingdom, believers enter the physical New City on the New Earth in New Heaven. "God and...the Lamb shall be" (Rev. 22.3) the center thereof.

Once-Saved-Always-Saved:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

7. Do you believe when you were saved (born again, new birth) right there and then you received eternal life which can never lost (John 10.27-29)?

Overcomers and Non-Overcomers in Christ:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

8. Are there spiritual as well as fleshly or 'carnal' Christians (Rom. 7.14,19; 1 Cor. 3.1) though saved lose the reward of reigning with Christ during the 1000 years (Jude 14,15; Rev. 20.4-6)?

Restoration of Creation, and Nature Proves God:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

9. Six literal days sum up the period of restoration after earth became desolate and waste (Gen. 1.2), and the uncreated Creator is proven by observing cause and effect in nature (Rom. 1.20).

God's Infinite Foreknowledge:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

10. Do you believe God is all-knowing, all-powerful, omnipresent and has infinite foreknowledge? This is the God open theists reject and therefore are not saved.

Dividing Spirit, Soul and Body:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

11. God-consciousness resides in the functions of intuition, communion and conscience of our spirit, and self-consciousness in the mind, will and emotion of our soul (Heb. 4.12, 1 Thess. 5.23).

Hell is the Place of Eternal Separation from God:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

12. Do you agree Hell is not annihilation but the place of eternal torment for the unsaved after being resurrected to the Great White Throne for judgment (Rev. 19.20; 20.10,15)?

Baptism With or Without Water:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

13. After being saved, baptism is with or without physical water in burial (Rom. 6.4) and resurrection (v.5) to come out of the world into a living hope of newness (1 Pet. 1.3) with Christ.

Word of God in 66 Books:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

14. Do you believe the Bible is the complete word of God about Jesus Christ, no more no less, in the 66 books from Genesis to Revelation?

Biblical Tongues are Real Languages Only:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

15. Do you believe speaking in tongues is discernible linguistic syntax known to the speaker and a gift of the Holy Spirit to share the word of God to the nations in different languages?

Laying On of Hands:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

16. Laying on of hands joins us experientially to the body of Christ, but we ought not to abuse it as popularly seen on tv by false Christians in the Word of Faith movement (see video).

Women Apostles but Mary Sinned:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

17. Women can be apostles (1 Pet. 3.7), elders and teachers (Gal. 3.28), but "that which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3.6) so Mary was born into sin, made mistakes and sinned like us all.

Regional Apostles Appoint Local Elders:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

18. Apostles directly commissioned by God work in a region of churches and appoint Elders of a church locality (a city, town, rural area) who then approve the Elders of meeting places.

Meeting Place Finder for the Body of Christ:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

19. Do you accept Apostles and Elders organizing the Church on the Meeting Place Finder for the body of Christ in agreement with these 18 questions? (See all 37 questions in your profile.)

 

[emilynghiem]

When I get to Heaven I will have the joy of being with God and the Lamb for eternity, and with all those who are saved, chosen by God before the foundation of the world. When I get to Heaven you will be forgotten, so I will have no thought of you at all. That's what the Bible says. You want a hypothetical case of you being Heaven and want my reaction to that, but I don't do hypotheticals, as the Bible is clear, you are going to Hell, not Heaven, obviously, for reject Jesus as Lord and Savior.

Ok. I will forgive you for not being able to read, and not finding it in your heart to give a simple yes or no answer to my question.

You excuse yourself by saying it is hypothetical and then say:

as the Bible is clear, you are going to Hell, not Heaven, obviously, for reject Jesus as Lord and Savior

So I ask you to please please please educate me. Where exactly did I ever reject Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, the one who died a horrible and painful death for my sins? Links to the post(s) I have made here to convince you of that. And please provide the Chapter and verse in the Bible to back your claim.

Because, failing that, you have proven to me and everyone else here that you have put yourself in Jesus Christ's place on the Judgement Throne.

You see, I know I am saved. I have a personal relationship with Christ; albeit strained at times. And the kicker? Even though you have put my worldly flesh through great trials and tribulations here, making me want to curse you badly: I will rejoice when I see you in heaven my brother in Jesus Christ because then the lampshade will be off all the way. And we will know each others hearts.

I'd be happy to show you by you answering the questions at registration here (but you don't have to register),

Register at Christian Forums

Thank you Parture
This website appears very good
and I already signed up.
I was surprised the questions were
written carefully enough they did not drag in things I couldnt agree to as universal so this was very well written and guided to be centered and unifying.

Very good! I made one post and
sent a msg to you as well. Thanks!

 

[emilynghiem]

Of course Christians forgive, but we are not universalists. We do not believe everyone gets saved.

If you are wise you leave that to God who is all knowing and we are not. I had no problem with how the website stated it because it left it open to the unsaved suffering torment. It didnt dictate about the unsaved. I agree hell is not annihilation either. So I agree with how the website and Bible say it.
But not how you try to say the same thing.

So this is what I see:
If what YOU MEAN is the same thing as in the Bible and on the website,
YES I agree with what you mean, and I agree that "hell is NOT annihilation"
and I agree the unsaved suffer in endless torment, etc.

I just didn't agree with how YOU said it which came across as something else,
as if YOU determine who is saved or not by whether they meet YOUR expectations,
and I object to you deciding that not God.

P.S. the reason I believe in Universal Salvation is God's plan
is that once people SEE that forgiveness heals the mind body spirit/soul and relations,
there is no reason NOT to accept forgiveness and healing.

I have atheist friends who even accept the help with healing.
So if even atheists want the healing that comes with forgiveness,
then eventually everyone will be saved. It is too compelling.
Nobody really wants to suffer, we are just afraid of change and control from outside.
and that can be overcome. So the process is going to win out and bring
healing and salvation from suffering to all. Even Buddha had visions of
a future Buddha or Spiritual Being coming and fulfilling the path to end all suffering.
So if even Buddhism points to the end times fulfilled in Christ Jesus, then all
witnesses point to the same truth that comes from the same source or one God.

 

[Parture]

If you are wise you leave that to God who is all knowing and we are not. I had no problem with how the website stated it because it left it open to the unsaved suffering torment. It didnt dictate about the unsaved. I agree hell is not annihilation either. So I agree with how the website and Bible say it.
But not how you try to say the same thing.

So this is what I see:
If what YOU MEAN is the same thing as in the Bible and on the website,
YES I agree with what you mean, and I agree that "hell is NOT annihilation"
and I agree the unsaved suffer in endless torment, etc.

I just didn't agree with how YOU said it which came across as something else,
as if YOU determine who is saved or not by whether they meet YOUR expectations,
and I object to you deciding that not God.

P.S. the reason I believe in Universal Salvation is God's plan
is that once people SEE that forgiveness heals the mind body spirit/soul and relations,
there is no reason NOT to accept forgiveness and healing.

I have atheist friends who even accept the help with healing.
So if even atheists want the healing that comes with forgiveness,
then eventually everyone will be saved. It is too compelling.
Nobody really wants to suffer, we are just afraid of change and control from outside.
and that can be overcome. So the process is going to win out and bring
healing and salvation from suffering to all. Even Buddha had visions of
a future Buddha or Spiritual Being coming and fulfilling the path to end all suffering.
So if even Buddhism points to the end times fulfilled in Christ Jesus, then all
witnesses point to the same truth that comes from the same source or one God.

You come across with a doubletongue because you said "universal salvation is God's plan" to imply everyone eventually gets saved including those who go to Hell and then said "I agree the unsaved suffer in endless torment." So which is it? I'm holding you to this because it is far more important than you realize.

You said, "it left it open to the unsaved suffering torment." Look at the question again.

Hell is the Place of Eternal Separation from God:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

12. Do you agree Hell is not annihilation but the place of eternal torment for the unsaved after being resurrected to the Great White Throne for judgment (Rev. 19.20; 20.10,15)?

I don't see where it is left open. Eternal is eternal. They are forever separated from the saved. What the Holy Spirit is showing me is that those who go to Hell will never change their mind to reject God, just as those in the New Earth and New Heaven will never sin. And because you leave Hell open to be saved from, I am convinced you are not a Christian, because you will forever worship this false Christ of an Open Hell. Hell is permanently shut at the end of the millennial kingdom.

You said, "I just didn't agree with how YOU said it which came across as something else
as if YOU determine who is saved or not by whether they meet YOUR expectations,
and I object to you deciding that not God."

Nowhere do I determine who is saved apart from God, but it is the Holy Spirit who reveals to me in agreement with the word of God who is saved. You are just falsely accusing claiming it is me doing it alone, when it is not, but the Holy Spirit leading me to tell you that you are not a child of God because you are like Satan who would attempt to keep Hell Open forever.

Think how precarious your position is because you don't know and can't discern who is saved or not, to break bread with if saved and to lead to Christ if they are not saved going to Hell.

Buddha had not accepted Christ, for Buddhists are atheists. Think how evil that is for joe blow to say he is expecting a future himself. That is self-centered, self-involved, self-deluded. The teachings of Buddha do not agree with the teachings of the Bible and you will never be able to make them fit, for the exclusivity of Christ is a solidly proven fact.

I have always known you were not a Christian, because your words do not flow with the Holy Spirit. They are strange. God does not know you.

 

[emilynghiem]

If you are wise you leave that to God who is all knowing and we are not. I had no problem with how the website stated it because it left it open to the unsaved suffering torment. It didnt dictate about the unsaved. I agree hell is not annihilation either. So I agree with how the website and Bible say it.
But not how you try to say the same thing.

So this is what I see:
If what YOU MEAN is the same thing as in the Bible and on the website,
YES I agree with what you mean, and I agree that "hell is NOT annihilation"
and I agree the unsaved suffer in endless torment, etc.

I just didn't agree with how YOU said it which came across as something else,
as if YOU determine who is saved or not by whether they meet YOUR expectations,
and I object to you deciding that not God.

P.S. the reason I believe in Universal Salvation is God's plan
is that once people SEE that forgiveness heals the mind body spirit/soul and relations,
there is no reason NOT to accept forgiveness and healing.

I have atheist friends who even accept the help with healing.
So if even atheists want the healing that comes with forgiveness,
then eventually everyone will be saved. It is too compelling.
Nobody really wants to suffer, we are just afraid of change and control from outside.
and that can be overcome. So the process is going to win out and bring
healing and salvation from suffering to all. Even Buddha had visions of
a future Buddha or Spiritual Being coming and fulfilling the path to end all suffering.
So if even Buddhism points to the end times fulfilled in Christ Jesus, then all
witnesses point to the same truth that comes from the same source or one God.

You come across with a doubletongue because you said "universal salvation is God's plan" to imply everyone eventually gets saved including those who go to Hell and then said "I agree the unsaved suffer in endless torment." So which is it? I'm holding you to this because it is far more important than you realize.

You said, "it left it open to the unsaved suffering torment." Look at the question again.

Hell is the Place of Eternal Separation from God:

• Yes
• No
• Not sure

12. Do you agree Hell is not annihilation but the place of eternal torment for the unsaved after being resurrected to the Great White Throne for judgment (Rev. 19.20; 20.10,15)?

I don't see where it is left open. Eternal is eternal. They are forever separated from the saved. What the Holy Spirit is showing me is that those who go to Hell will never change their mind to reject God, just as those in the New Earth and New Heaven will never sin. And because you leave Hell open to be saved from, I am convinced you are not a Christian, because you will forever worship this false Christ of an Open Hell. Hell is permanently shut at the end of the millennial kingdom.

You said, "I just didn't agree with how YOU said it which came across as something else
as if YOU determine who is saved or not by whether they meet YOUR expectations,
and I object to you deciding that not God."

Nowhere do I determine who is saved apart from God, but it is the Holy Spirit who reveals to me in agreement with the word of God who is saved. You are just falsely accusing claiming it is me doing it alone, when it is not, but the Holy Spirit leading me to tell you that you are not a child of God because you are like Satan who would attempt to keep Hell Open forever.

Think how precarious your position is because you don't know and can't discern who is saved or not, to break bread with if saved and to lead to Christ if they are not saved going to Hell.

Buddha had not accepted Christ, for Buddhists are atheists. Think how evil that is for joe blow to say he is expecting a future himself. That is self-centered, self-involved, self-deluded. The teachings of Buddha do not agree with the teachings of the Bible and you will never be able to make them fit, for the exclusivity of Christ is a solidly proven fact.

I have always known you were not a Christian, because your words do not flow with the Holy Spirit. They are strange. God does not know you.

Hi Parture I am very gladdened and uplifted to see how passionately you are moved.
I am sorry I did not mean to make you panic about this or other issues.

There are sources I have run into who teach hell as "nonexistent" or hell as "death"
which I agree with you is conflicting; so I can assure you that is NOT what I mean either!

As I tried to clarify before, I answered yes to the questions on the website
including this one because
* I AGREE that Hell is NOT annihilation
* and I agree with how it was worded that the unsaved are in torment
which I AGREE is endless because unforgiveness traps people in a vicious cycle
that only divine forgiveness can break. I had no problem understanding how the
website worded this question so I answered yes.

The one place I had trouble with wording was the
"literal 6 days" because this was not clear if it is 6 days to God
which is not the same thing as 6 earth days to man literally. But I assume
this meant the 6 days in the Bible. I understand that in some contexts
6 days means 6 ages or stages, so it depends if you are talking
about the literal or figurative meaning and what you are applying this to.

Because the Bible does not say LITERAL 6 days, I would not really recommend
inserting LITERAL in there unless you are trying to correct some other
bad interpretation that is even more confusing and conflicting and that's
why that was stated that way.

I would keep it 6 days and not try to change it.
I thought the term co-crucifixion was a bit new, but I understood
what it meant. I just wouldn't use that term because it sounds too much
like someone thinking they are Jesus instead of sharing in carrying the cross.
------------
BTW your concerns about me "going to hell"
I only go through hell for the purpose of guiding someone out of that path.
But yes, I end up going through hell with people sometimes
if they drag me through it, accusing and abusing me
because of past unforgiven issues they dump and project onto me.
The point of such a process is to work through the past issues
and forgive them through Christ to break the cycle so they quit repeating.
Otherwise, it does cause endless torment. Collectively this is hell.
The cause of the endless cycle is unforgiveness and retribution
and the cure is forgiveness in Christ Jesus.
-----------------------------------

Your concerns about what Buddha taught about the natural
laws of cause and effect will take up a separate message.

The gentiles and the natural laws are not addressed in the Bible.

What I have found is the natural laws
as the Constitutional principles are based on,
science and sociology/psychology seek to understand and study,
and Buddhism and Greek ethics were based on
Come from the Same God who created NATURE.

So Jesus fulfills those laws that represent
God's universal laws of nature.

The difference is these laws are not perfect.
There is a final stage in Buddhism yet to be
given and fulfilled so I believe that is where
Christianity was destined to come later and finish this path.

So it isn't AGAINST Christianity if people don't REJECT
Jesus. I agree that if Buddhists, atheists, Jews, Muslims
REJECT Jesus and do not reconcile with Christians
then that is divisive and wrong.

Where people reconcile in Christ, then Jesus
fulfills all laws and all paths as Lord of all lords and laws
and authority over all dominions visible or invisible.
See Colossians 1:16.

I will post a separate msg about where
Buddhist principles ALIGN with Christianity
similar to how Moses gave the laws that
Jesus later fulfills. And where you can see
the final stage is missing and not given to
finish the "trinity".

There are 3 refuges in Buddhism that
ALIGN with the Holy Trinity (as man's
laws are made in the image of God's laws)
but there are only 2 promises and there
are supposed to be 3 to correspond with
the Trinity, so one principle is not yet given
in Buddhism to complete the teachings.

I believe this will be resolved in Christ
as fulfilling the natural laws including
how these are taught in Buddhism
as well as in Constitutionalism that
are given by God because they are
based on natural laws given by God.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear Parture
Regarding Buddhism and how God/Holy Spirit showed me
that the laws are made in the image of God

A. We know that God manifests
as God the Father Source of Life Creation Universal truth and laws
Jesus Christ the Son or Word of God or the laws/justice of God made incarnate
and the Holy Spirit is where Healing Grace is received to bring peace
and Comfort to humanity on the earthly plane

B. We know that there are Two Great commandments
and a New Commandment that correspond to the Holy Trinity
1. To Love GOD with all our heart mind and soul
or love of GOD
3. To love our neighbor as ourselves
or love of humanity that brings peace on earth by the Holy Spirit
2. To love one another as Christ Jesus loves us
or the love of CHRIST that JOINS
the love of God with love of man as ONE
so this is Unconditional love of God
and NOT the materialistic love of man
but the Godly perfect love of Christ instead of material rewards of man

In Buddhism there are the three refuges
the Buddha the Dharma and the Sangha
A. Buddha which means perfect wisdom or knowledge
so again Wisdom is a name of GOD,
knowing GOD is perfect awareness
so this level aligns with GOD
Dharma means the spiritual laws
We know that Christ fulfills the laws
so this level is what aligns with Jesus.
The laws of karma or cause and effect
are fulfilled by Perfect Justice that Jesus embodies
Sangha means the community or order
so this is the level of the church body
that collectively means all humanity
which we know corresponds to the
Holy Spirit that works through and unites
the people as one body of Christ

So receiving Christ means understanding
that God/Christ/Holy Spirit fulfills the
Buddha/Dharma/Sangha as one.

The natural laws reflect God in the same
way that man is made in the image of God.
We are body/mind/spirit or physical/mental/spiritual

and the Trinity in every religion REFLECTS
these same three levels:
* of individual or physical
* psychological level of conscience or laws governing relations
* and collectively the whole of society or humanity

Curiously, Buddhism had two promises or principles
that correspond to the TWO great commandments
1. to develop perfect WISDOM
2. to develop perfect COMPASSION

Clearly these two natural laws align with the
two great commandments that Jesus said
ALL the laws and prophets hang on.
So this includes Buddha as a prophet similar
to Moses who gave these same two laws
which Jesus fulfills.

Wisdom is another role or name of GOD
where the references to God as Wisdom
in the Bible outnumber references to
God as heavenly father by 10 to 1

Compassion aligns with
loving our neighbor as ourselves
(though even broader where you
even care about the whole creation
that supports life for people and
have compassion for all life that affects us)

What I find missing is one more
principle that should have something
to do with the level of the Sangha
or Holy Spirit.

I am guessing it would be
developing perfect communication
or perfect community relations.
Not sure but I believe that
as more Buddhist and Christians
align these principles and see
where they connect in Christ,
then the final principle will be revealed
to complete the teachings while
reconciling with Christianity.

Buddhism is one of the ways that
the natural laws of God are given,
similar to how Moses gave the laws
to the Jews and the Jews later receive
Christ and fulfill the laws. The Buddhists
are given natural laws, and so are the
Constitutionalists and Christ will fulfill
those as well since natural laws come from God.

 

[emilynghiem]

Parture
one system I looked at that had a complete set of
three levels of a trinity AND three principles that corresponded
was Confucianism

Again since these are manmade laws, I see this as affirmation
that man is made in the image of God, so man's laws reflect God's laws,
they keep repeating the same levels of the trinity to show
they are inspired by universal truths that come from God as the SAME source

This is why Jesus fulfills all these laws as the one authority
to whom all the laws are given, because the natural laws are from God.

Confucianism: The Three Cardinal Virtues
1. JEN = supreme virtue/love/benevolence
2. YI = highest principle embodied in man
3. LI = outward expression of moral sentiment/standard

Again, the level of Conscience where Christ governs
and Jesus fulfills the laws of Justice are in the middle.
The physical level is the earthly level of man
and the collective spiritual level is God's truth and love.

So this reflects the same levels of God as the Trinity.

The Three guiding principles that correspond to
Jen Yi and Li were something like
1. take refuge in the highest Good
which we know God represents the highest Good
2. I can't find the second one that corresponded
to conscience or Christ, about embodying the
highest principles, I will have to look up my old list of notes on this
3. and something corresponding to the last level
of manifesting the highest moral standard of conduct in society

I tried to find this online and found this which
sounds like the Trinity again:
"ruler guiding subject, father guiding son, and husband guiding wife"

So this shows the idea
that all these religions keep reflecting the
same trinity whether you call it natural laws
or spiritual laws coming from the same God.

Man is made in the image of God
so all our laws attempting to reflect
the relationship between
man on an individual level
and God on a collective scale
joined by a relationship by
conscience or laws
is going to be made in this same trinity pattern.

==================

still can't find the three guiding principles listed together
but found this which shows the connection with the Holy Trinity:

The ethical system of jen(humaneness)-yi (righteousness)-li (rules of propriety). Confucius’ teachings of jen, yi, and li comprise the most fundamental thought and principles in Confucius’ ethics. Jen has been translated as love, benevolence, humanity, human heartedness, virtue, perfect virtue, true manhood, and humaneness; it also signifies the ideal relationship between people. Yi generally means righteousness, appropriateness, obligation, and justice, and is “the principle of setting things right and proper”.10Li indicates ceremony, rites, decorum, courtesy, etiquette, rules of propriety, and at first represents the ceremonial order, but in the full sense connotes the sociopolitical order.9Jen (humaneness) and yi (righteousness) could be said to be the inner core of morality that motivates and guides man to pursue the dao, and li (rules of propriety) could be described as the outer form and standard of morality that is concrete for man to abide by in the context of human society.

 

[Iceweasel]

So either you believe and are saved or you doith good and are saved. Which is it?

Salvation is not by works lest anyone should boast.

So why mention works? You have contradicted thyself.

Works are unto rewards for believers, not for initial salvation.

Initial salvation? You don't even know what you're babbling about. If works were irrelevant to salvation it wouldn't be mentioned.

Works are mentioned unto rewards not for initial salvation.

I asked what you were talking about and you simply regurgitated the same bullshit phrase. You can't answer the question.

 

[Iceweasel]

The universe is 13.8 billion years old (Gen. 1.1). Man has only been God-conscious since 4004 BC (Gen. 1.26), not 40,000 years. God breathed in the breath of life, directly creating man's spirit, and when it made contact with the body of Pre-Endemic, Pre-Adamic men (who cease to exist), many became a living soul with both a body and a spirit.

Genesis 1.1 doesn't say the Earth is 13.8 billion years old, you lied. And there's no mention of man existing before Adam. You're just making shit up (or repeating what you were told).

You haven't given a good reason for Jesus to enter His creation later than He did. I think it was the perfect time under Roman persecution. I am glad these past many centuries were after the cross to show mankind the glory of His Church. If Christianity did not exist, mankind would have destroyed itself long ago. It is the restraining power of the Holy Spirit that keeps things in check.

Things have been in check since the Roman days? You are nuts. Jesus appeared when he did because that's when the Hellenized Jews cobbled it together from tradition, mythology, folklore and Greek thought, moving away from hard line OT literalism.

 

[Taz]

The papyri are dated several generations after the facts, and that's just FRAGMENTS of the earliest finds. Not even a whole fucking sentence! Nothing can be proven to have been written during the presumed authors' lifetime. Now you know.

The papyri are dated within a generation of the Apostles. John was still alive 95 AD. These papyri are more than just one sentence. Sometimes they are chapters, books, or just a few paragraphs. Daniel B. Wallace has a whole manuscript recently, and some more papyri, found from the late 1st century. You can quote the early church fathers quoting all the verses from the NT except 11 verses. Obviously what they are quoting came before their quoting it. Nothing in antiquity has sources so close to their events as do we have for the NT. It also depends where you calculate a generation from. Since John wrote Revelation 95 AD then someone who is 10 years old at the time will be within a generation in 180 AD. Nobody in antiquity has still surviving papyri so close to their events. The Bible holds the highest standards. So according to you then Plato, Aristotle, Julius Caesar and Tiberius never existed. Nobody takes your view. No historian gives you any respect.

If the papyri are dated " to within a generation of the Apostles", then you admit that nothing exists from the hand of the actual Apostles. Good, That's progress.

The reason there is no surviving papyri from the middle of the 1st century and earlier is simply because they don't get preserved. That's why you can't find any papyri from anyone in antiquity for a good 300 to 500 years after, except for Jesus which was within a generation. And even closer than that for Paul's travels in the 50s and 60s.

So there's no surviving papyri during the time of the actual events, but there's some from 150 years after that? That makes no sense. The real reason that there's no recording of events when they happened is because those events never happened. Much more likely.

The earliest still surviving papyri is about 80 or 90 AD which is 20 or 30 years after they were written at the latest 60 AD as the Apostles died in the Neronian persecutions 65 AD. And Revelation was written 95 AD by John so some papyri that still survived was when he was still alive . For anyone else in antiquity you would have to go back hundreds of years for the earliest surviving papyri. Jesus is the most documented person in antiquity, even so much so, He has more sources for Him than any 10 figures combined. So if you want to deny Him you have to deny Aristotle, Julius Caesar, Plato, but I don't know any sane position who would do that. So you see you have a double standard and that's how I know you are being unethical. It makes sense to me that since the church fathers quoted all the verses of the NT except for 11 verses that what they were quoting came before them.

Do you have a link to these fragments? And I agree that it's possible that a guy named Jesus was preaching in the area at that time, in fact, I've read that there were several guys named jesus preaching around that time, lol. Your Jesus might be the most documented dude in history, but what's written in the bible and attributed to him is written after the facts and hearsay.

 

[Taz]

My favorite piece of evidence is most scholars concede Paul wrote 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2 in which cites the gospel, resurrection appearances, his own eyewitness account, spent 15 days with Peter, and with John and James too. The Creed he cites that he received before the Apostles he was with, goes all the way back to the cross as he was converted 2 years after the cross. There is no naturalistic explanation to explain this away.

Also, Luke wrote a biography of Paul in Acts, but he makes no mention of his death. Paul died 65 AD in the Neronian persecutions. So not only did he write all his epistles before then, but Luke said Acts was part two of his former work of Luke. So that places Acts around 55 AD, Luke around 45 AD. And since Luke took from Mark, that places Mark around 35 AD just 2 years after the cross. Not only that but since Mark was good pals with Peter that places 1 & 2 Peter quite early also.

What scholars? You have no proof, zero, that Paul ever wrote anything since nothing for his era has ever been found, dated and attributed to him. Go ahead, try to find something, with a link...

12 Historical Facts (Most Critical Scholars Believe These 12 items)

1. Jesus died by crucifixion.

2. He was buried.

3. His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.

4. The tomb was empty (the most contested).

5. The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus (the most important proof).

6. The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.

7. The resurrection was the central message.

8. They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem.

9. The Church was born and grew.

10. Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship.

11. James was converted to the faith when he saw the resurrected Jesus (James was a family skeptic).

12. Paul was converted to the faith (Paul was an outsider skeptic).

What Do Most Scholars Believe?

In The Case for the Real Jesus by Lee Strobel (p. 112), Mike Licona said, "[Gary] Habermas has compiled a list of more than 2,200 sources in French, German, and English in which experts have written on the resurrection from 1975 to the present. He has identified minimal facts that are strongly evidenced and which are regarded as historical by a large majority of scholars, including skeptics. We try to come up with the best historical explanation to account for these facts. This is called the Minimal Facts Approach."

William Lane Craig (sadly, a non-OSASer) does confirm Habermas recorded 1400 scholars (both skeptics and non-skeptics alike) whom 75% agree the tomb was empty and nearly all agree the original disciples truly believed they had seen Jesus alive from the dead bodily, for a vision wouldn't convince the disciples of resurrection.

Gary Habermas said (2009) on the John Ankerberg Show, "I just did a count recently of what scholars say. First of all you can count guys on one hand of the 2400 sources since 1975 on the resurrection [in] French, German, English...who think apparent death [is true]. When scholars respond they still cite David Strauss. I think we would all like to have that kind of influence in our writings. His critique has been around almost 200 years." Habermas was referring to Strauss's argument that Jesus wouldn't look much like a risen Messiah to the disciples all battered and bruised.

Habermas and Licona co-authored the award winning book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (2004). Historian Paul Maier said the book's response to naturalistic explanations for the resurrection "are the most comprehensive treatment of the subject anywhere." Philosopher J. P. Moreland said the book presented what "may be the most thorough defense of historicity of the resurrection."

Gary said in a 2009 Ankerberg video, "If we start with the cross approximately 30 AD and call that ground zero, 1 Corinthians 15 checks in at about 55 AD whatever the writer, conservative or not conservative, we have 25 years. In ancient historiography this is incredible in a time when the best known biography of Alexander the Great is that of Plutarch almost 400 years after Plutarch. When we learn about the early Caesars from Tacitus to Suetonius a 'good gap' is 100 years; 25 is incredible [for Jesus]. Paul says, 'I am passing onto you as first importance that which I also received' (1 Cor. 15.3)." Paul said, "I make known to you brethren the gospel which I preached to you" (1 Cor. 15.1). Gary says, "This earlier preaching may have taken place 51 AD about 21 years after the cross." But point of fact, Jesus died not in 30 AD, but 33 AD on April 1st (Gregorian), April Fool's Day, Nisan 14, Friday which is no later than 18 years after the cross.

Gary said, "Almost all contemporary scholarship believes Paul received this material (Gal. 1.18) when he went to Jerusalem about 5 years after the cross. Some put it as early as 3 and as late as 8, but he was converted about 2 years after the cross before he went away for 3 years. Paul spent 15 days with Peter. It is safe to say they talked about more than just the weather. Paul said he preached nothing but Christ crucified." Gary said about James D.G. Dunn, "In his recent book Remembering Jesus that this passage (1 Cor. 15.3ff) wasn't just taught. It was already stratified. It was already put in this creedal form within months of the crucifixion."

Gary said (see video), "I did a count recently of people who have written from about 1990 to-date [2009]. 75% of scholars today say that resurrection or 'something like it occurred.' Of that 75%, three to one say it is a bodily appearance. Ted Peters had a book that was published by Eerdmans a few years ago, and 20 out of 20 scholars in his book that he edited said 'bodily resurrection.' Higher critical scholars who are in the minority will still usually concede the appearance involved sight and was embodied."

In the summer of 2012, Gary wrote in the Southeastern Theological Review, "by beginning with a 'lowest common denominator' version of the facts. If I am correct in holding that this basis is still enough to settle the most pressing historical issues, then it is indeed a crucial contribution to the discussions. We will return below to some ramifications here. Regarding my references to the 'vast majority' or 'virtually all' scholars who agree, is it possible to identify these phrases in more precise terms? In some contexts, I have identified these expressions more specifically. At least when referencing the most important historical occurrences, I frequently think in terms of a ninety-something percentile head-count. No doubt, this is one of the reasons why the concept has gained some attention.

"My bibliography is presently at about 3400 sources and counting, published originally in French, German, or English. Initially I read and catalogued the majority of these publications, charting the representative authors, positions, topics, and so on, concentrating on both well-known and obscure writers alike, across the entire skeptical to liberal to conservative spectrum. As the number of sources grew, I moved more broadly into this research, trying to keep up with the current state of resurrection research. He said this again at William Lane Craig's "On Guard" conference, "1 Corinthians is one of six to eight books all accredited critical scholars accept. You can count the exception on two hands, probably one hand. I have 3400 sources in a bibliography from 1975 to the present (2012). When I say you can count the guys on one hand who disagree with this it is not very many. They believe Paul is the best source, and 1 Corinthians is one of the most dependable sources. They allow 1 Corinthians and Galatians. Both are on the accepted list. Bart Ehrman says they are the authentic Pauline epistle. So does most everybody else. Whatever you write, these two books are allowed [indicating Paul's genuine belief]. Paul is writing a mere [no more than] 25 years later. That is incredible. We have no other founder of a major world religion who has miracles reported of him within a generation."

"I endeavored to be more than fair to all the positions. In fact, if anything, I erred in the direction of cataloguing the most radical positions, since this was the only classification where I included even those authors who did not have specialized scholarly credentials or peer-reviewed publications. It is this group, too, that often tends to doubt or deny that Jesus ever existed. Yet, given that I counted many sources in this category, this means that my study is skewed in the skeptical direction far more than if I had stayed strictly with my requirement of citing only those with scholarly credentials. Still, I included these positions quite liberally, even when the wide majority of mainline scholars, 'liberals' included, rarely even footnoted this material. Of course, this practice would also skew the numbers who proposed naturalistic theories of the resurrection, to which I particularly gravitated.

"The result of all these years of study is a private manuscript of more than 600 pages that simply does little more than line up the scholarly positions and details on these 140 key questions....

"[Mike] Licona begins by listing my three chief Minimal Facts regarding Jesus’ fate: (1) Jesus died due to the process of crucifixion. (2) Very soon afterwards, Jesus’ disciples had experiences that they believed were appearances of the resurrected Jesus. (3) Just a few years later, Saul of Tarsus also experienced what he thought was a post-resurrection appearance of the risen Jesus."

Those aren't actual "facts". Facts can be backed up with real evidence. And all your links lead to personal opinions, not peer-reviewed scientific studies. Please try again.

These are facts as they are backed up with evidence. Only peer reviewed and accredited work by scholars are included in the list. We call this the Minimal Facts Approach because most of these scholars concede Paul really wrote 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2 and believed that the Apostles truly believed they saw Jesus alive from the dead.

Please point out the evidence, I see none. And I read the Minimal Facts Approach and it's not even remotely based on real facts.

 

[teddyearp]

When I get to Heaven I will have the joy of being with God and the Lamb for eternity, and with all those who are saved, chosen by God before the foundation of the world. When I get to Heaven you will be forgotten, so I will have no thought of you at all. That's what the Bible says. You want a hypothetical case of you being Heaven and want my reaction to that, but I don't do hypotheticals, as the Bible is clear, you are going to Hell, not Heaven, obviously, for reject Jesus as Lord and Savior.

Ok. I will forgive you for not being able to read, and not finding it in your heart to give a simple yes or no answer to my question.

You excuse yourself by saying it is hypothetical and then say:

as the Bible is clear, you are going to Hell, not Heaven, obviously, for reject Jesus as Lord and Savior

So I ask you to please please please educate me. Where exactly did I ever reject Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, the one who died a horrible and painful death for my sins? Links to the post(s) I have made here to convince you of that. And please provide the Chapter and verse in the Bible to back your claim.

Because, failing that, you have proven to me and everyone else here that you have put yourself in Jesus Christ's place on the Judgement Throne.

You see, I know I am saved. I have a personal relationship with Christ; albeit strained at times. And the kicker? Even though you have put my worldly flesh through great trials and tribulations here, making me want to curse you badly: I will rejoice when I see you in heaven my brother in Jesus Christ because then the lampshade will be off all the way. And we will know each others hearts.

I'd be happy to show you by you answering the questions at registration here (but you don't have to register),

Register at Christian Forums

Interesting questions to which I answer all except the very last one in the affirmative, however, hardly a real answer to my question.

 

[Parture]

If you are wise you leave that to God who is all knowing and we are not. I had no problem with how the website stated it because it left it open to the unsaved suffering torment. It didnt dictate about the unsaved. I agree hell is not annihilation either. So I agree with how the website and Bible say it.
But not how you try to say the same thing.

So this is what I see:
If what YOU MEAN is the same thing as in the Bible and on the website,
YES I agree with what you mean, and I agree that "hell is NOT annihilation"
and I agree the unsaved suffer in endless torment, etc.

Your problem though is that you believe people in Hell will eventually be saved. That's not in the Bible.

I just didn't agree with how YOU said it which came across as something else,
as if YOU determine who is saved or not by whether they meet YOUR expectations,
and I object to you deciding that not God.

Where did I say I determine who is saved? But I certainly can know who is saved by the Holy Spirit and word of God.

P.S. the reason I believe in Universal Salvation is God's plan
is that once people SEE that forgiveness heals the mind body spirit/soul and relations,
there is no reason NOT to accept forgiveness and healing.

There is a reason, for many people want to be eternally separated from God for all kinds of reasons. The Holy Spirit told me you are not a Christian because Jesus is not universalist. He is particular.

I have atheist friends who even accept the help with healing.
So if even atheists want the healing that comes with forgiveness,
then eventually everyone will be saved. It is too compelling.
Nobody really wants to suffer, we are just afraid of change and control from outside.
and that can be overcome. So the process is going to win out and bring
healing and salvation from suffering to all. Even Buddha had visions of
a future Buddha or Spiritual Being coming and fulfilling the path to end all suffering.
So if even Buddhism points to the end times fulfilled in Christ Jesus, then all
witnesses point to the same truth that comes from the same source or one God.

This is new age. Buddha rejected the Messiah.

Hi Parture I am very gladdened and uplifted to see how passionately you are moved.
I am sorry I did not mean to make you panic about this or other issues.

Why would I be panicked by your false beliefs and the fact that you are not a Christian but a new ager universalist?

The one place I had trouble with wording was the
"literal 6 days" because this was not clear if it is 6 days to God
which is not the same thing as 6 earth days to man literally. But I assume
this meant the 6 days in the Bible. I understand that in some contexts
6 days means 6 ages or stages, so it depends if you are talking
about the literal or figurative meaning and what you are applying this to.

These are 6 literal earthly days with evenings and mornings, but they sum up the period of restoration.

Because the Bible does not say LITERAL 6 days, I would not really recommend
inserting LITERAL in there unless you are trying to correct some other
bad interpretation that is even more confusing and conflicting and that's
why that was stated that way.

The Bible does literally say 6 days.

I would keep it 6 days and not try to change it.
I thought the term co-crucifixion was a bit new, but I understood
what it meant. I just wouldn't use that term because it sounds too much
like someone thinking they are Jesus instead of sharing in carrying the cross.

Co-death and co-crucifixion is death to our old man. They are the most accurate terms. It's an old term, not a new term. You're confusing carrying the cross with our death on the cross with Christ. Once one has died with Christ on the cross then they bear their own cross daily. You don't carry Jesus' cross. That's heresy.

------------
BTW your concerns about me "going to hell"
I only go through hell for the purpose of guiding someone out of that path.
But yes, I end up going through hell with people sometimes
if they drag me through it, accusing and abusing me
because of past unforgiven issues they dump and project onto me.
The point of such a process is to work through the past issues
and forgive them through Christ to break the cycle so they quit repeating.
Otherwise, it does cause endless torment. Collectively this is hell.
The cause of the endless cycle is unforgiveness and retribution
and the cure is forgiveness in Christ Jesus.

You've never been in Hell. Nobody has. The first person will be the Antichrist then the False Prophet. You still remain unforgiven by God because you are a universalist.

The gentiles and the natural laws are not addressed in the Bible.

Of course natural laws and gentiles are in the Bible. The disciples were to preach to all the nations. And natural laws of nature prove God's existence. You're confused in everything you say.

The difference is these laws are not perfect.
There is a final stage in Buddhism yet to be
given and fulfilled so I believe that is where
Christianity was destined to come later and finish this path.

The natural laws are perfect. You're confused. Buddhism is atheism and atheism is false. Plus he was a fat fuck. Gluttonous. Christianity existed before Buddhism as the Jews were looking for the Christian Messiah.

So it isn't AGAINST Christianity if people don't REJECT
Jesus. I agree that if Buddhists, atheists, Jews, Muslims
REJECT Jesus and do not reconcile with Christians
then that is divisive and wrong.

Against Christianity if you don't reject Jesus? No it isn't. It is for Jesus. The only way to reconcile with Jesus is to accept Him who He is. These factions don't.

I will post a separate msg about where
Buddhist principles ALIGN with Christianity
similar to how Moses gave the laws that
Jesus later fulfills. And where you can see
the final stage is missing and not given to
finish the "trinity".

Finish the Trinity? Is that another new age phrase?

There are 3 refuges in Buddhism that
ALIGN with the Holy Trinity (as man's
laws are made in the image of God's laws)
but there are only 2 promises and there
are supposed to be 3 to correspond with
the Trinity, so one principle is not yet given
in Buddhism to complete the teachings.

Buddhism does not accept the Father, Son, Spirit. You're confused.

I believe this will be resolved in Christ
as fulfilling the natural laws including
how these are taught in Buddhism
as well as in Constitutionalism that
are given by God because they are
based on natural laws given by God.

You're wrong.

It would help you to read Gary R. Habermas, the leading scholar today on the resurrection. He use to be a Buddhist, now a Christian and rejects all things Buddhism.

Dr. Gary R. Habermas - Online Resource for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[Parture]

Dear Parture
Regarding Buddhism and how God/Holy Spirit showed me
that the laws are made in the image of God

A. We know that God manifests
as God the Father Source of Life Creation Universal truth and laws
Jesus Christ the Son or Word of God or the laws/justice of God made incarnate
and the Holy Spirit is where Healing Grace is received to bring peace
and Comfort to humanity on the earthly plane

B. We know that there are Two Great commandments
and a New Commandment that correspond to the Holy Trinity
1. To Love GOD with all our heart mind and soul
or love of GOD
3. To love our neighbor as ourselves
or love of humanity that brings peace on earth by the Holy Spirit
2. To love one another as Christ Jesus loves us
or the love of CHRIST that JOINS
the love of God with love of man as ONE
so this is Unconditional love of God
and NOT the materialistic love of man
but the Godly perfect love of Christ instead of material rewards of man

In Buddhism there are the three refuges
the Buddha the Dharma and the Sangha
A. Buddha which means perfect wisdom or knowledge
so again Wisdom is a name of GOD,
knowing GOD is perfect awareness
so this level aligns with GOD
Dharma means the spiritual laws
We know that Christ fulfills the laws
so this level is what aligns with Jesus.
The laws of karma or cause and effect
are fulfilled by Perfect Justice that Jesus embodies
Sangha means the community or order
so this is the level of the church body
that collectively means all humanity
which we know corresponds to the
Holy Spirit that works through and unites
the people as one body of Christ

So receiving Christ means understanding
that God/Christ/Holy Spirit fulfills the
Buddha/Dharma/Sangha as one.

The natural laws reflect God in the same
way that man is made in the image of God.
We are body/mind/spirit or physical/mental/spiritual

and the Trinity in every religion REFLECTS
these same three levels:
* of individual or physical
* psychological level of conscience or laws governing relations
* and collectively the whole of society or humanity

Curiously, Buddhism had two promises or principles
that correspond to the TWO great commandments
1. to develop perfect WISDOM
2. to develop perfect COMPASSION

Clearly these two natural laws align with the
two great commandments that Jesus said
ALL the laws and prophets hang on.
So this includes Buddha as a prophet similar
to Moses who gave these same two laws
which Jesus fulfills.

Wisdom is another role or name of GOD
where the references to God as Wisdom
in the Bible outnumber references to
God as heavenly father by 10 to 1

Compassion aligns with
loving our neighbor as ourselves
(though even broader where you
even care about the whole creation
that supports life for people and
have compassion for all life that affects us)

What I find missing is one more
principle that should have something
to do with the level of the Sangha
or Holy Spirit.

I am guessing it would be
developing perfect communication
or perfect community relations.
Not sure but I believe that
as more Buddhist and Christians
align these principles and see
where they connect in Christ,
then the final principle will be revealed
to complete the teachings while
reconciling with Christianity.

Buddhism is one of the ways that
the natural laws of God are given,
similar to how Moses gave the laws
to the Jews and the Jews later receive
Christ and fulfill the laws. The Buddhists
are given natural laws, and so are the
Constitutionalists and Christ will fulfill
those as well since natural laws come from God.

Buddha was a man who was fat not God so that does not agree with the God the Father in the Trinity. Buddha rejected the Messiah.

 

[Parture]

My favorite piece of evidence is most scholars concede Paul wrote 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2 in which cites the gospel, resurrection appearances, his own eyewitness account, spent 15 days with Peter, and with John and James too. The Creed he cites that he received before the Apostles he was with, goes all the way back to the cross as he was converted 2 years after the cross. There is no naturalistic explanation to explain this away.

Also, Luke wrote a biography of Paul in Acts, but he makes no mention of his death. Paul died 65 AD in the Neronian persecutions. So not only did he write all his epistles before then, but Luke said Acts was part two of his former work of Luke. So that places Acts around 55 AD, Luke around 45 AD. And since Luke took from Mark, that places Mark around 35 AD just 2 years after the cross. Not only that but since Mark was good pals with Peter that places 1 & 2 Peter quite early also.

What scholars? You have no proof, zero, that Paul ever wrote anything since nothing for his era has ever been found, dated and attributed to him. Go ahead, try to find something, with a link...

12 Historical Facts (Most Critical Scholars Believe These 12 items)

1. Jesus died by crucifixion.

2. He was buried.

3. His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.

4. The tomb was empty (the most contested).

5. The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus (the most important proof).

6. The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.

7. The resurrection was the central message.

8. They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem.

9. The Church was born and grew.

10. Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship.

11. James was converted to the faith when he saw the resurrected Jesus (James was a family skeptic).

12. Paul was converted to the faith (Paul was an outsider skeptic).

What Do Most Scholars Believe?

In The Case for the Real Jesus by Lee Strobel (p. 112), Mike Licona said, "[Gary] Habermas has compiled a list of more than 2,200 sources in French, German, and English in which experts have written on the resurrection from 1975 to the present. He has identified minimal facts that are strongly evidenced and which are regarded as historical by a large majority of scholars, including skeptics. We try to come up with the best historical explanation to account for these facts. This is called the Minimal Facts Approach."

William Lane Craig (sadly, a non-OSASer) does confirm Habermas recorded 1400 scholars (both skeptics and non-skeptics alike) whom 75% agree the tomb was empty and nearly all agree the original disciples truly believed they had seen Jesus alive from the dead bodily, for a vision wouldn't convince the disciples of resurrection.

Gary Habermas said (2009) on the John Ankerberg Show, "I just did a count recently of what scholars say. First of all you can count guys on one hand of the 2400 sources since 1975 on the resurrection [in] French, German, English...who think apparent death [is true]. When scholars respond they still cite David Strauss. I think we would all like to have that kind of influence in our writings. His critique has been around almost 200 years." Habermas was referring to Strauss's argument that Jesus wouldn't look much like a risen Messiah to the disciples all battered and bruised.

Habermas and Licona co-authored the award winning book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (2004). Historian Paul Maier said the book's response to naturalistic explanations for the resurrection "are the most comprehensive treatment of the subject anywhere." Philosopher J. P. Moreland said the book presented what "may be the most thorough defense of historicity of the resurrection."

Gary said in a 2009 Ankerberg video, "If we start with the cross approximately 30 AD and call that ground zero, 1 Corinthians 15 checks in at about 55 AD whatever the writer, conservative or not conservative, we have 25 years. In ancient historiography this is incredible in a time when the best known biography of Alexander the Great is that of Plutarch almost 400 years after Plutarch. When we learn about the early Caesars from Tacitus to Suetonius a 'good gap' is 100 years; 25 is incredible [for Jesus]. Paul says, 'I am passing onto you as first importance that which I also received' (1 Cor. 15.3)." Paul said, "I make known to you brethren the gospel which I preached to you" (1 Cor. 15.1). Gary says, "This earlier preaching may have taken place 51 AD about 21 years after the cross." But point of fact, Jesus died not in 30 AD, but 33 AD on April 1st (Gregorian), April Fool's Day, Nisan 14, Friday which is no later than 18 years after the cross.

Gary said, "Almost all contemporary scholarship believes Paul received this material (Gal. 1.18) when he went to Jerusalem about 5 years after the cross. Some put it as early as 3 and as late as 8, but he was converted about 2 years after the cross before he went away for 3 years. Paul spent 15 days with Peter. It is safe to say they talked about more than just the weather. Paul said he preached nothing but Christ crucified." Gary said about James D.G. Dunn, "In his recent book Remembering Jesus that this passage (1 Cor. 15.3ff) wasn't just taught. It was already stratified. It was already put in this creedal form within months of the crucifixion."

Gary said (see video), "I did a count recently of people who have written from about 1990 to-date [2009]. 75% of scholars today say that resurrection or 'something like it occurred.' Of that 75%, three to one say it is a bodily appearance. Ted Peters had a book that was published by Eerdmans a few years ago, and 20 out of 20 scholars in his book that he edited said 'bodily resurrection.' Higher critical scholars who are in the minority will still usually concede the appearance involved sight and was embodied."

In the summer of 2012, Gary wrote in the Southeastern Theological Review, "by beginning with a 'lowest common denominator' version of the facts. If I am correct in holding that this basis is still enough to settle the most pressing historical issues, then it is indeed a crucial contribution to the discussions. We will return below to some ramifications here. Regarding my references to the 'vast majority' or 'virtually all' scholars who agree, is it possible to identify these phrases in more precise terms? In some contexts, I have identified these expressions more specifically. At least when referencing the most important historical occurrences, I frequently think in terms of a ninety-something percentile head-count. No doubt, this is one of the reasons why the concept has gained some attention.

"My bibliography is presently at about 3400 sources and counting, published originally in French, German, or English. Initially I read and catalogued the majority of these publications, charting the representative authors, positions, topics, and so on, concentrating on both well-known and obscure writers alike, across the entire skeptical to liberal to conservative spectrum. As the number of sources grew, I moved more broadly into this research, trying to keep up with the current state of resurrection research. He said this again at William Lane Craig's "On Guard" conference, "1 Corinthians is one of six to eight books all accredited critical scholars accept. You can count the exception on two hands, probably one hand. I have 3400 sources in a bibliography from 1975 to the present (2012). When I say you can count the guys on one hand who disagree with this it is not very many. They believe Paul is the best source, and 1 Corinthians is one of the most dependable sources. They allow 1 Corinthians and Galatians. Both are on the accepted list. Bart Ehrman says they are the authentic Pauline epistle. So does most everybody else. Whatever you write, these two books are allowed [indicating Paul's genuine belief]. Paul is writing a mere [no more than] 25 years later. That is incredible. We have no other founder of a major world religion who has miracles reported of him within a generation."

"I endeavored to be more than fair to all the positions. In fact, if anything, I erred in the direction of cataloguing the most radical positions, since this was the only classification where I included even those authors who did not have specialized scholarly credentials or peer-reviewed publications. It is this group, too, that often tends to doubt or deny that Jesus ever existed. Yet, given that I counted many sources in this category, this means that my study is skewed in the skeptical direction far more than if I had stayed strictly with my requirement of citing only those with scholarly credentials. Still, I included these positions quite liberally, even when the wide majority of mainline scholars, 'liberals' included, rarely even footnoted this material. Of course, this practice would also skew the numbers who proposed naturalistic theories of the resurrection, to which I particularly gravitated.

"The result of all these years of study is a private manuscript of more than 600 pages that simply does little more than line up the scholarly positions and details on these 140 key questions....

"[Mike] Licona begins by listing my three chief Minimal Facts regarding Jesus’ fate: (1) Jesus died due to the process of crucifixion. (2) Very soon afterwards, Jesus’ disciples had experiences that they believed were appearances of the resurrected Jesus. (3) Just a few years later, Saul of Tarsus also experienced what he thought was a post-resurrection appearance of the risen Jesus."

Those aren't actual "facts". Facts can be backed up with real evidence. And all your links lead to personal opinions, not peer-reviewed scientific studies. Please try again.

These are facts as they are backed up with evidence. Only peer reviewed and accredited work by scholars are included in the list. We call this the Minimal Facts Approach because most of these scholars concede Paul really wrote 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2 and believed that the Apostles truly believed they saw Jesus alive from the dead.

Please point out the evidence, I see none. And I read the Minimal Facts Approach and it's not even remotely based on real facts.

The evidence was already given which you did not refute. I explained how the MFA works.

 

[Iceweasel]

The evidence was already given which you did not refute. I explained how the MFA works.

You demonstrated how BS works.