Discussion on the Christ Jesus.

[tulisan666]

---

If Matthew, Luke and John based their story in Mark and Mark doesn't show the story of ressurection, what would it represent? I'm pretty sure anyone can answer that. Its not good for the Church.

you and i both know the church does not want to admit to mistakes. it took them that long to admit they were wrong about galileo...we wont be around that long before they'd admit to some mistakes...if you could wait for a century or two.hehehe

Whose to say that inaccuracy does not have a role in the Divine Scheme?

well the catholics never admitted any inaccuracies with regards their teachings.
*some people do find some inconsistencies...

[Icei_NheLL]

And its disheartening to see people believing every word in the Bible without question thinking that it is the word of God. I do believe in God, but God is not someone to make mistakes.

Jesus is a historical figure who is the true king of Jerusalem. Unfortunately, they were conquered by the Romans thus Roman governors and kings were instilled in the position. Jesus, being the true heir to the throne is somebody who wants to get the throne back.

[rcruman]

And its disheartening to see people believing every word in the Bible without question thinking that it is the word of God. I do believe in God, but God is not someone to make mistakes.

So it will lead us to conclusion that you're God is not the God in the Bible but a mixed God from other books you've read and acquired?

Jesus is a historical figure who is the true king of Jerusalem. Unfortunately, they were conquered by the Romans thus Roman governors and kings were instilled in the position. Jesus, being the true heir to the throne is somebody who wants to get the throne back.

Can you give me a history in Jerusalem that Christ became king in this area.
Christ is not a king of earth throne but a throne in our hearts (followers) and in heaven.

Peace!

[Icei_NheLL]

So it will lead us to conclusion that you're God is not the God in the Bible but a mixed God from other books you've read and acquired?

Well, if you get to reach in that conclusion, then that would also lead me to comprehend that you are trying to say that my God is perfect (as the name implies) and yours is not.

Can you give me a history in Jerusalem that Christ became king in this area.
Christ is not a king of earth throne but a throne in our hearts (followers) and in heaven.

How could you adore someone without even understanding his life? If Jesus is indeed from the Davidic line (as the Bible suggests) - then don't you think that Jesus is the heir to the throne of Jerusalem?...thus, he is the rightful king? of you haven't thought about that?

[rcruman]

So it will lead us to conclusion that you're God is not the God in the Bible but a mixed God from other books you've read and acquired?
Well, if you get to reach in that conclusion, then that would also lead me to comprehend that you are trying to say that my God is perfect (as the name implies) and yours is not.

How come its perfect where its head came from buddhist, body came from Catholic, hands came from agnostics, feet came from hindus, and etc.
My God in the bible is complete, doesn't need anything to make Him complete.
I think you can figure now what type of god do you have, a mixed god that doesn't stand alone but need company.

Can you give me a history in Jerusalem that Christ became king in this area.
Christ is not a king of earth throne but a throne in our hearts (followers) and in heaven.

How could you adore someone without even understanding his life? If Jesus is indeed from the Davidic line (as the Bible suggests) - then don't you think that Jesus is the heir to the throne of Jerusalem?...thus, he is the rightful king? of you haven't thought about that?

Can you give me a verse in the bible that Christ is claiming the kingdom of david?
I think you know in the history that the kingdom of david and solomon was gone before Christ manifest into flesh.
Christ is claiming the kingdom of God which is from heaven not the physical kingdom of david.

Peace!

[Icei_NheLL]

rcruman: How come its perfect where its head came from buddhist, body came from Catholic, hands came from agnostics, feet came from hindus, and etc.
My God in the bible is complete, doesn't need anything to make Him complete.
I think you can figure now what type of god do you have, a mixed god that doesn't stand alone but need company.

that's the problem with it sir when you tend to put words in other people's mouth. did I ever say such a thing? besides, spirituality shouldn't be solely based on one's religion. Moreover, did I ever say "completeness"? I think I am quite aware that the theme used is "perfection".

And how can you say that my God needs company? when you are not even aware of my inclination.

rcruman: Can you give me a verse in the bible that Christ is claiming the kingdom of david?
I think you know in the history that the kingdom of david and solomon was gone before Christ manifest into flesh.
Christ is claiming the kingdom of God which is from heaven not the physical kingdom of david.

that's the problem with you sir, you don't study the other aspects. by the way you throw your argument, may i be accurate or not, but it sounds as if you are not even aware of the political climate, the social flow, history, psychological inclination, etc of the people during the time of Jesus.

you solely base your arguments in one source...the Bible. All I can say is, your loyalty is superb...but it has no difference to those people who blew themselves out taking with them innocent lives in the name of religion. If you were born a muslim, i wouldn't be surprised if you buckle yourself with a bomb belt.

I wouldn't mind taking just one source, if the source itself is concise and perfect (without errors and edition). But then again, the Church, the Romano Catolico and yours, will rather see with a blind eye than accept the truthfulness of the Bible's tampering, contradictions and even it's questionable history of compilation.

Its understandable.

To admit that the Bible is not perfect is to admit that your religion is not perfect. And I just find it amusing that they think that their leader's interpretation of the Bible is far more better, if not perfect, compared to other church's interpretation. Did these leaders, upon waking up one morning, suddenly realized that they are already perfect and should make their own church for they have perfectly interpreted the Bible? Talk about people trying to play God.

[giovanni]

The Malaysian newspaper Makkal Osai has been placed under governmental suspension from publishing for a month, due to its publication on Tuesday, August 21st of a picture of Jesus Christ holding a cigarette and a can of beer.

Although the Tamil-language newspaper apologized on Thursday, August 23rd, saying that a graphic artist had erred in downloading the picture from the Internet, some in Malaysia's minority religions drew a comparison to the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy that erupted in 2005 over a Danish paper's publication of cartoons that many Muslims felt insulted Islam and the prophet Muhammad.

The altered picture has been traced by a blogger called "Gateway Pundit" to an April 2007 post on a blog called "Religion Makes Me Laugh." The name of the post where the altered image appears is "Top Ten Reasons Why Beer Is Better Than Jesus."

It has been noted that this apparently unwitting use of a satirical Internet graphic bears a similarity to a 2001 news story in which protesters supporting Osama bin Laden were found to have unknowingly used an altered image of bin Laden that included a picture of Bert, the Sesame Street muppet, by his side.



http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/20...-malaysia.html

[d`monyita]

hahayyyy so bad.

[stabwounds]

jesus still rocks!

[vladmire]

news everyday....