Your Date With Destiny: Meeting the Real Jesus

Originally posted by badmedia

Make sense?

Yes. But unlike you, I just don't have the patience for the likes of Oliveoil. I like to say what's on my mind, then move on. I couldn't sit here on ATS for 10 pages going back and forth with a person whose whole world exists inside a book.

But hey, whatever floats your boat is okay by me.

reply to post by truthtothemasses


I'm "blessed" in that manner. I work online from home. So it's not a big deal for me to spend a few minutes posting on a topic, and I type really fast, so it doesn't take me as long to respond as it might for others.

It is however frustrating at times.

reply to post by badmedia

It's not a loaded question, and you have once again avoided it. I asked you very specific question, and you can't answer it. In your avoidance, you for some reason try to justify god or whatever. Did I ask you to justify those things? No, not at all.

You asked me if God needs humans to kill others for him? I gave you the answer according to the Bible and not my personal view.Of course God doesn't need anyone to do anything for him at all.
What is your point?



[edit on 15-12-2009 by oliveoil]

reply to post by badmedia

Because a doctor goes to heal the sick, not the healthy.
I look at it in reverse. I think, what if it was me that was/is sick. Would I want someone who had the potential to help me to walk away? Would I want them to just give up on me? I wouldn't.
So, I look for people who will disagree with me to debate, rather than those who are like minded.
In the end, the most I could do is plant seeds. I've already planted the seeds in oliveoil, they just don't realize it yet. As that seed(idea) has been planted, then every time in the future when these topics come up, they will remember that seed. And every time they do that, it is watered.
It's something I'm experienced in doing. Nobody ever gives me credit for such, and that is fine, as they are the ones who grew the tree, not me. And nobody ever just up and changes their mind on the spot, and that is fine. But I know that in time people change. I've seen it happen many times.
Everyone will think they are right. It's a given. If they thought they were wrong, then they would change their mind.
Sometimes the soil is harder in places than in others is all. A close minded person just has tougher soil. An open minded person, more open to the seed. But either way, once the tree grows they will have good fruit. So that is what I look to, the tree they will have rather than the hard soil they currently have.
Make sense?.

Well lets see If we make any sense? So far you have said that you are unsure of the existence of Jesus.

You do not believe in Jesus being God.

You don't believe the Holy Ghost is God.

You reject the Trinity

You denounce Paul.

You denounce Jesus dieing for your sins

and reject him as your savior

You side with people who reject any form of religion

The list goes on and on.

Your the one who is sick and needs help. That's why I have continued staying on this topic.

reply to post by truthtothemasses

I like to say what's on my mind, then move on.

So then let it be written and let it be done. Thank you.

Originally posted by oliveoil
You do not believe in Jesus being God.

You don't believe the Holy Ghost is God.

You reject the Trinity

You denounce Paul.

You denounce Jesus dieing for your sins

and reject him as your savior

You side with people who reject any form of religion

The list goes on and on.

Your the one who is sick and needs help. That's why I have continued staying on this topic.

For starters, the entire reason I accept Jesus in what he says is because I see the father within him. I see the understanding of what you call the holy spirit in his words. It is based on that merit alone that I know what Jesus says is true.

I denounce your entire religion as being anti-christ.

The fact it's a religion in the name of Christ should be your first clue.

Go ahead and name all the things of the anti-christ/mystery religion, and I will point you to Christianity.

Oh, like in that left behind series, where the family is killed if they don't accept the new religion. I will point to you the time when Christians would burn people in public if they did not accept that religion in the name of Christ. Why were they burned in public? To instill fear into the public.

Gee, do you think there might be a very good reason why the version of Christianity might be the way it is now? Could it be because they killed anyone who didn't go along? And wow, isn't that something Jesus said would happen? Oh yeah it is.

A religion that won't be happy until they are the 1 world religion? Check, hello Crusades.

Jesus tells you that which comes after him has nothing for him, still you accept what Paul says, and denounce Jesus as the one who is wrong, not Paul. Oh yes, many of people accepted that mystery religion. The one that serves the beast of this world, and Paul is the false prophet that delivers it.

You worship idols, not knowing what they really mean. You accept that which has been hand feed to you, rather than seeking the true understanding of the father. Jesus even tells you to seek, but instead you accept that which was given to you by this world, and by men.

While Jesus got his followers through the understanding he spoke, and the works he did. Christianity has gained it's followers through sin, through fear, death and destruction.

All this Jesus directly warns of in Matthew 7. But still you refuse to see it. Because you have directed all the focus outward, looking at every other religion as being that which is false, not realizing your own faults.

So is it coincidence that Matthew 7 talks about focusing inward before focusing outward at the start, before going on to talk about how many will do things in his name that are deemed wonderful works, but Jesus will turn them away because they have worked in sin.

And yet, still you try to convince me that Jesus didn't really mean that, what he meant is that by people working in sin, it means they didn't believe he died for their sins and is saved by that death.

You avoid the points I make, just flat out ignore them. Why? Tell me, what does this verse mean?

Matthew 9:13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Tell me, why doesn't Jesus tell the rich man the same things you tell me?

Jesus was killed so that a system of lies and false authority could live. The names may have been changed, but the functions continue. This is why Jesus tells you to look at their fruits. By their fruits, you can see they are the same tree, new name. The same conditions Jesus dealt with back then still exist today. He was murdered by them for that reason - in your bible. They conspired against him.

And even according to the bible, that will continue until he returns. The truth was murdered so that the lie could live. The lie will exist until the truth returns. The only way to know the difference between the truth and the lie is to have understanding. Those with understanding can not be plucked from the fathers hand because they will know the lie when they see it, no different than how those with understanding are the ones who keep the commandments.

I do not denounce Jesus, I do not denounce the father, but you better believe I denounce your religion, and all the false authority men claim in the name of god.

Matthew 21

23And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?

24And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things.

25The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?

26But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet.

27And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

28But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my vineyard.

29He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went.

30And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not.

31Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.

32For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.

reply to post by badmedia


WOW! Badmedia - that was impressive. I could never address "point by point" the way you have.

I've had people ask me why I believe in Jesus but not Christianity.

Because I believe Jesus was a Light Being - an evolved being sent to earth to help humans evolve spiritually.

Christianity is a man made political power machine - basically.

reply to post by badmedia

For starters, the entire reason I accept Jesus in what he says is because I see the father within him. I see the understanding of what you call the holy spirit in his words. It is based on that merit alone that I know what Jesus says is true.

If you excepted Jesus and everything he says as truth then you would except all scriptures as truth even if you disagree with what is being said.

Jesus recognized the scriptures in their entirety, And if you followed him, like you say you do, you would too.

The problem is you have no concept of the principles for sound interpretation of scripture and are not attentive to the analogy of faith at all.

You have no belief in the inerrancy of the Scriptures what so ever, And your utter disrespect and ignorance is obvious.

You call the Catholic religion the anti Christ religion and yet your agnostic views are clearly anti-Christ.

You should really take a long hard look at what you are saying and preaching to people in Gods name.

I see no reason to further our discussion. Its been very informative to say the least.I wish you luck.

Badmedia.

I'm still watching from the sidelines.

I still haven't seen a reply to my previous question from anyone.

It would be educational for me to hear your take on this.

You quoted Luke 9:1. Please take a shot at this and see what you come up with.

1. Who was there?
2. Who saw that?
3. Who wrote it down?


Thanks,

peas

Jesus recognized the scriptures in their entirety, And if you followed him, like you say you do, you would too.

Wait what, werent the NT written after Jesus died ?

Originally posted by theonlyrusty

Badmedia.

I'm still watching from the sidelines.

I still haven't seen a reply to my previous question from anyone.

It would be educational for me to hear your take on this.

You quoted Luke 9:1. Please take a shot at this and see what you come up with.

1. Who was there?
2. Who saw that?
3. Who wrote it down?


Thanks,

peas

Hes most likely going to tell you that there are two types of sick. Physically and spiritually.
(which he is correct) However, he'll try to tie it into something like only Jesus and his teachings has the authority to heal the spiritually sick, or some cockamamie backwards theory to support his ideological view.

And as far as your 3 questions they are indeed valid.

Originally posted by gYvMessanger

Jesus recognized the scriptures in their entirety, And if you followed him, like you say you do, you would too.

Wait what, werent the NT written after Jesus died ?

This is a good question, However, you forget to acknowledge that Jesus had risen from the dead and visited his disciples and sent the Holy Ghost to guide them. And through the holy Ghost (God) they wrote the remaining scriptures.So I guess you could say that Jesus did recognized the scriptures in there entirety.
I was referring to the scriptures that Jesus was aware of while he was alive.But thanks for pointing this out.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by oliveoil]

Originally posted by oliveoil
If you excepted Jesus and everything he says as truth then you would except all scriptures as truth even if you disagree with what is being said.

Says who? If I disagree with what is being said, then there is a reason for that disagreement. I go in the way of understanding. Which funny enough, is exactly what the bible says to do.

I have showed you on multiple occasions and even explained it. Knowledge of the holy is understanding, not memorization of a book. Not accepting a book and so forth.

Jesus recognized the scriptures in their entirety, And if you followed him, like you say you do, you would too.

No he didn't, and as the poster above me pointed out the NT wasn't even writen until long after his death.

The problem is you have no concept of the principles for sound interpretation of scripture and are not attentive to the analogy of faith at all.

Tell me, what are the "principles for sound interpretation of scripture"? What you really mean there is - "You don't accept what the church says, and thus you are wrong".

You don't know the difference between faith and blind faith.

You have no belief in the inerrancy of the Scriptures what so ever, And your utter disrespect and ignorance is obvious.

Says the person who over and over refuses to even answer the points I make - while I am quoting the bible in the process.

You call the Catholic religion the anti Christ religion and yet your agnostic views are clearly anti-Christ.

I'm not agnostic, agnostic means "without knowledge". I am gnostic. I have knowledge and understanding, of which came directly from the father.

It is said however, that one must become as a child. What that means is that one must become agnostic, which is an honest position of not knowing(the child). This is important because a child in it's honesty realizes it does not know, thus the child asks(seeks) the answers.

Gnostic(with knowledge of the holy) is the goal, and to be agnostic(like the child) is a step in that process. I was agnostic before I become gnostic. I did not accept what mean told me, I sought the truth and the father answered.

In the end, I offered specific reasons and examples why Christianity is the anti-Christ religion. Like most things, in response you simply accuse me.

You should really take a long hard look at what you are saying and preaching to people in Gods name.

I only repeat that which the father has taught me to begin with. But I take these things as a compliment, because Jesus was also accused of many such things. I find myself in good company there.

I see no reason to further our discussion. Its been very informative to say the least.I wish you luck.

Luck has nothing to do with it.

Originally posted by theonlyrusty

Badmedia.

I'm still watching from the sidelines.

I still haven't seen a reply to my previous question from anyone.

It would be educational for me to hear your take on this.

You quoted Luke 9:1. Please take a shot at this and see what you come up with.

1. Who was there?
2. Who saw that?
3. Who wrote it down?

Thanks,

peas

I'm not sure I understand the questions, or the importance in them. It would seem that the verse itself would answer those questions.

1Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases.

2And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick.

So, it would be:

1. Jesus + disciples
2. disciples
3. Luke

But that doesn't seem like a question you would ask, so I don't think I'm understanding what you mean.

reply to post by badmedia

I'm not agnostic, agnostic means "without knowledge". I am gnostic. I have knowledge and understanding, of which came directly from the father.

Lol,
So now your gonna "teach" me what agnostic means according to what you believe?

Wikipedia-
Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions..

Websters-
one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Shall I pull up the statement you had made earlier on your uncertainty of Jesus existing or not?

I think that fits the word Agnostic perfectly.

Why do you continue to contort everything that I say?
I cant see how anyone cant figure you out.

Like I said in my last post directed at you, Our conversation is over.

And by the way, Your signature does you no justice. Peace my brother.

Originally posted by oliveoil
Lol,
So now your gonna "teach" me what agnostic means according to what you believe?

Wikipedia-
Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions..

Websters-
one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Shall I pull up the statement you had made earlier on your uncertainty of Jesus existing or not?

I said I know the father. Thus I have no doubt that god exists. If you were to actually read what Jesus says, then you would know he says it is the father who does those things. As such, I know the father within Jesus and I know that is real. Which is the entire reason it doesn't matter to me if "Jesus" was real, even though I have no problems with it being true. Even if he didn't exist, someone obviously existed to know the way. Either way, the story itself is a story of truth and the way, and has the understanding of the father.

I think that fits the word Agnostic perfectly.

I don't think many would say that reading comprehension was your strong suit.

Why do you continue to contort everything that I say?
I cant see how anyone cant figure you out.

You mean like pretending the definition of agnostic said Jesus rather than god? Not to mention missing the entire point behind what I was saying?

Tell me: How would you know Jesus is Jesus if he came to you? That is the point of this thread, and that was the biggest reason I said what I did about Jesus. How will you be able to tell that Jesus is Jesus? Will you make him perform miracles for you etc?

Like I said in my last post directed at you, Our conversation is over.

Ok.

And by the way, Your signature does you no justice. Peace my brother.

You could have just asked me what it means.


[edit on 12/16/2009 by badmedia]

reply to post by badmedia


To wrap this up and answer your impending question,

Tell me: How would you know Jesus is Jesus if he came to you? That is the point of this thread, and that was the biggest reason I said what I did about Jesus. How will you be able to tell that Jesus is Jesus? Will you make him perform miracles for you etc?

If you are referring to the Parousia (Which you don't believe) , I will know it is Jesus because it was not only prophesied in Daniel 7:13-14,but also in Acts1:11.

Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

Acts 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Unless I die and go to heaven and meet him first,I will definitely know who he is.

Thanks Badmedia.....

That wasn't so hard and it taught me something.

I should revise my questions. I have never understood why these wouldn't be written in first person if the writer was there. So in essence, Luke should have written, "Jesus assembled us........and WE went out.......

Maybe it explains my questions better.

Luke was a physician and an associate of Paul...from what I read. He wanted to give a detailed account of exact dates of the life of jesus and he was the only one that wrote about jesus' early childhood. (from what I read.)

So to rephrase my questions...

1. When was it written? (In Lukes' case, it was 60 ad.......years after the event)
2. Who was there to witness it to write it down?
3. Did the writer actually see it or did he just hear about it before writing it down?
4. Who (The actual person) wrote it down? (i.e. Who wrote Psalms?)

AS far as "what's the point and what difference does it make?...Well, it makes alot of difference.
If I go to the police station and report a vehicular accident that I didn't witness, and I wait a week before going to report it, and then I have to wait a month to tell about it in court, how well am I going to report that wreck. I used to be a P.I. and had to have facts straight before I said anything. That's where I am coming from in my questioning.

Glad I finally had a response to this. It really helped me. So how about
Genesis 1:1........The story of Noah (any verse)....The story of Jesus in the desert with satan (any verse).

I do like seeing these things from something other than "my" perspective.

I am outta here and just gonna hide in the bushes for a while.

peas

reply to post by theonlyrusty


Those kinds of questions are best suited for someone else honestly. Scholars and such. There are some good ones around here that post who know the original languages and that kind of history. Sigismundus seems to be pretty well educated on such things.

There is another example of something like that, where Jesus is supposed to be alone, so who wrote that etc?

The best I could do would be to give ways in which it could be possible. But yet which one was true, I don't know.

I do not know the answers directly, I could only repeat what is generally accepted outside speculation. I focus my attention more towards the understanding being expressed.



[edit on 12/16/2009 by badmedia]

reply to post by oliveoil


So, the only way you will recognize Jesus is if he comes through the clouds?

Does that also mean that the anti-Christ could fake the event, and you would believe it as well?

Does that include(or is) aliens?

What if Jesus just came to you, would you say to him - you aren't Jesus because you didn't come through the clouds? Or is it impossible for Jesus to come to someone in any other manner than what is said?