Quote:Our only bug bear with what you said was that you seemed to insist that this was a human sacrifice... we couldn't accept every time you said it was something it was not. You objected to our correction - I don't know why if this wasn't your beef. That's the only reason it's still alive.
You can't say he was human and his death was a sacrifice without him being a human sacrifice following. That is what I object to, Frodo. There is no reason to correct. My two main questions remain and they have been answered in the affirmative with a little hoopla about him being perfect thrown in for good measure.
Quote:But that's where you are very wrong. All of us agree on the point raised. You keep twisting that to your own words and then object saying it's off topic when yet again we're forced to desagree.
I keep twisting what, specifically? I called a sacrifice a sacrifice. It's obviously not convoluted enough for you guys, so you disagree. It makes no fucking sense to me.
Quote:Coffeeveritas confirmed the core issue we keep repeating. Theology isn't an exact science and we're continually working at better interpretation so that we can understand what was plainly understood back when it was writen.
Yeah, the problem is that it is not cryptically written. I can understand the words in the Bible quite well. The problem arises when the words do not suit the modern views of Christianity, so you all make shit up and interpret it how you feel so that it comes out backing up your claim. For example, the passage I quoted clearly states that there is one god and that there is one man who serves as a messenger from god -- Jesus. That gets interpreted to mean god is his own messenger by whoever that dolt was in here. In context, out of context, in any way, it says something very concise and yet Christians twist it to suit their trinity crap. You know why some Christians do not believe in the trinity? Because it doesn't say there is a trinity in the fucking bible. It says Jesus is the son of god. All mentions of him having god in him are no more than mentions of his parenthood.
Quote:And I suspect you're just being deliberately provocative with that.
I'm dead serious, Frodo. This forum has given me an opinion of Christians that I never had before. I truly never realized how contradictory you all were because the Christians in my family all believe the same crap. When I came here, I realized that you all change the Bible to suit your own beliefs. You don't know it, but you would be the same exact person if you never read the Bible. Nothing about religion changes any of you. You change religion to suit you. That is why some of you are nice, some of you are stupid, some of you are condescending, some of you are murderers, etc. You guys use that book as if it was Kryptos, but it is actually Winnie the Pooh. The words are as plain as pudding. There is no interpretation necessary.
For example,
This passage is quoted by that Jesus is divine website as proof that the Bible says Jesus is god.
"For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God."
It doesn't say he was god at all. It says they were going to kill him for making himself equal to god.
Another
"I and the Father are one." 31 The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" 33 The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God."
I and the father are one does not mean Jesus is god. As you have said, he is a part of god. The son of a person is part of that person. It goes on to say he showed them good works from the father, not himself. He refers to god as a separate entity throughout the Bible. The Jews also called him a man who makes himself out to be god. Given that they kill the poor bastard, we can dismiss their sanity and move on.
And this is shown as proof that Jesus was worshiped, therefore god, given that Jesus said to only worship god.
"Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east, and have come to worship Him."
You will note that this came before Jesus preached to worship only god. He gave no order to be worshiped. Later, he warned people only to worship god. It was never said that people would be incapable of worshiping anyone else.
And this is about Jesus standing next to god.
"Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God."
This is what they consider proof that Jesus was god? That someone called him the son of man and said he stood next to god? What the fuck? It is translated into plain freaking English. Granted, the translations might not be perfect, but what are we thinking? Did they translate "God and Jesus were one entity, despite me seeing them stand together" into the above? I think not.
"They will call on My name, and I will answer them; I will say, ‘They are My people,’ and they will say, ‘The Lord is my God.’"
And what of this? Jesus was their preacher, they his people. Them saying the Lord is my god is saying Jesus is god?
My point is, why cherrypick, why "interpret?" Why not just read the fucking thing and take exactly what is says? In no place in the Bible did Jesus say, "Take what you will from this." He made statements to be taken precisely as they were said, according to him.
