Question on the Validity of Jesus

[ronedee]

Another thing I dont get is why the Heck does John from Prison send a messenger to ask about Jesus validity. If memory serves me correctly John the Baptist is a cousin of Jesus on his mothers side.

Here's one answer: that the events were real in the NT. Why would the "conspiracy" authors put that little item in there?

What it does do, is show the fragility of our faith! And the struggles we have at times in our humanness.

[Minimalist]

Why would the "conspiracy" authors put that little item in there?

Plot continuity. Just like in all novels.

[Esquilax]

This section of Scripture does two things. It establishes that the OT law is still in effect, and that we need a righteousness greater than what the scribes and pharisees had by following the letter of the law.

We later find out the only way for one's righteousness to exceed that of the scribe and pharisees is through the attonement Christ offered.

And that's where we run aground, because the sole use of a law is to be obeyed; as a concept, that's what it's for. If you're no longer required to obey them, in what sense are these laws extant at all?

Imagine if this was done today: what would happen if your given government introduced a law against the eating of pickles, yet amends this law so that it isn't going to be enforced, nor are you required to obey it. Wouldn't your first reaction be "well, what's the point, then?"

The old testament laws are in effect, in the sense that they absolutely aren't.

Not if we have been provided a way to escape conviction that costs us nothing.

I don't think your life and soul count as nothing, Drich. And I use the term soul in a poetic way, before we get into that.

the laws were not set up for us to obey. (That is why there was animal sacrfice in the OT, and Christ in the New.) The Law was only ever designed to establish the Expressed will of God, and His righteousness or standard that is required for us to be with Him for eternity.

So how did people in the old testament gain entry into heaven, if the laws were both impossible to obey, and not a requirement to be obeyed, but without the help of Jesus' sacrifice?

The 'loop hole' was always apart of the plan. which means by defination it is not a loop hole.

I submit to you that this is a nonsensical plan.

[MindForgedManacle]

He's just going to say that Jesus' crucifixion extended to past sins as well, and point out that the Bible says that Abraham is in heaven. Then I would come in and say that since Abraham was almost certainly a polytheist and didn't know about the requirement of accepting the Jesus as his redeeming lord and savior to get into heaven, so clearly Drich isn't being coherent since Abraham couldn't have conceivably accepted Jesus' sacrifice that he couldn't have known about, otherwise he would have ensured that each of his descendants didn't bother with the Mosaic Law and just focus on the salvation through Jesus aspect.
Then Drich will pull some turd out of his ass by entirely quoting things out of context - from his own Holy scriptures, no less! - and then I'll get pissed, Min will jump in and it will just be a clusterfuck.


You see, that's a much better prophecy than any Biblical one.

[Minimalist]

There is no where else to end up when they start pretending their fucking bible is real.

[Esquilax]

He's just going to say that Jesus' crucifixion extended to past sins as well, and point out that the Bible says that Abraham is in heaven. Then I would come in and say that since Abraham was almost certainly a polytheist and didn't know about the requirement of accepting the Jesus as his redeeming lord and savior to get into heaven, so clearly Drich isn't being coherent since Abraham couldn't have conceivably accepted Jesus' sacrifice that he couldn't have known about, otherwise he would have ensured that each of his descendants didn't bother with the Mosaic Law and just focus on the salvation through Jesus aspect.
Then Drich will pull some turd out of his ass by entirely quoting things out of context - from his own Holy scriptures, no less! - and then I'll get pissed, Min will jump in and it will just be a clusterfuck.


You see, that's a much better prophecy than any Biblical one.

And the moment he does that, I'll safely and happily assume that salvation is temporal, and not based on acceptance of christ at all, because the requirements for attaining heaven will become: "Except for situations in which accepting Jesus' sacrifice is not required, accepting Jesus' sacrifice is required to attain salvation."

[Aractus]

Given that the First Man and First Human Biblical existed as Dust then why did god need Jesus to be born of a Human Origin why not just have him created around the age of 30?

Because that wouldn't have fulfilled the requirements of the Jewish Law. Just like John the Baptist, he couldn't begin his ministry until after he turned 30, and even if he was created as an adult this would still be true.

[Minimalist]

However your boy did not come close to fulfilling those horseshit prophecies anyway.

Details....details......

[Aractus]

Min, you're trolling again. What I said had nothing to do with prophecy, it had to do with Jewish Law. If you wanted to be a Rabbi you had to be at least 30, and that law applied to anyone involved in the various ministries of the Jewish society.