This sky fairy thread is very entertaining.
Didn't you post several times you saw books fly through the air by themselves?
What caused it?
This sky fairy thread is very entertaining.
I would not include Oprah in that. Every religion other than Christianity views Jesus as a teacher and a prophet.I know I’m always under your skin so you have to attack me. You like to take everything I say ultra-literally in an effort to find something to attack and ignore context (which in fairness is usually comical directed towards you of course) because you do not care for what I have to say (yet oddly always engage in an argument). But let’s keep the debate lighthearted shall we?
If Jesus was just a teacher and not divine, what separates Him from Buddha, Ghandi, Oprah?
Wow Brian. That is not what I learned at all.Exactly.
His metaphors about the sheep and the goats and the fish are about people at the final judgement.
IncorrectI would not include Oprah in that. Every religion other than Christianity views Jesus as a teacher and a prophet.
Study comparative religion. Christianity wasn’t even created until 400 years after his death.
I’m surprised that some of the most “Christian “ on these boards have not studied the history.
I would not include Oprah in that. Every religion other than Christianity views Jesus as a teacher and a prophet.
Study comparative religion. Christianity wasn’t even created until 400 years after his death.
I’m surprised that some of the most “Christian “ on these boards have not studied the history.
Wow Brian. That is not what I learned at all.
The fish and feeding everyone was a lesson sharing. He didn’t make more fish.
Wow. I guess my religious upbringing differs greatly from yours and others.The Catholic Church was created way before that.
Here's a letter from 110 A.D. from Ignatius of Antioch where he mentions the Catholic Church.
Just FYI.
Also, in Judaism, Jesus is considered a heretic. Most other religions honor Him in some way, though.
"Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
CHURCH FATHERS: Epistle to the Smyrnaeans (St. Ignatius)
Featuring the Church Fathers, Catholic Encyclopedia, Summa Theologica and more.www.newadvent.org
Wow. I guess my religious upbringing differs greatly from yours and others.
Interpretations of the Bible vary greatly in this thread.
I do find these things interesting, but also remember, my family immigrated here very early on, and mostly for religious reasons. The MD Catholics, the Huguenots, and those escaping Cromwell.That letter I linked from Ignatius of Antioch is historical and from 110 A.D.
I thought you would find it interesting.![]()
I do find these things interesting, but also remember, my family immigrated here very early on, and mostly for religious reasons. The MD Catholics, the Huguenots, and those escaping Cromwell.
They all read different Bibles.
Interestingly enough, I was associated with a family briefly that were Plymouth Brethren.
They believe the Darby translation was the most accurate, claiming Darby could translate Aramaic, and he was the only one who could.
One of their main tenets is “the son Is not greater than the father”.
Have you read that?
What would your interpretation be?
I don't think this dating is widely supported. Generally speaking the proposed date for acts start in the 60s. A lot of people like the year 62 because it coincides with Paul's imprisonment. But it is most commonly dated between 60-90, although some suggest it is much later. Mainly because it may be pulling from Josephus. We don't see any external references until the late 2nd century.Incorrect
The term Christian is mentioned in Acts 11:26
Acts was written between 33CE-61CE by Luke. So literally 30 years after the death of Jesus.
The Christianity you refer to is the deathbed conversion of Constantine , st the council of nicea .
Acts was definitely before 70 and likely before 62 since no mention of James’s martyrdom.I don't think this dating is widely supported. Generally speaking the proposed date for acts start in the 60s. A lot of people like the year 62 because it coincides with Paul's imprisonment. But it is most commonly dated between 60-90, although some suggest it is much later. Mainly because it may be pulling from Josephus. We don't see any external references until the late 2nd century.
When the Christian church was established is highly debatable and dependent on how you define the church.
Me thinks you are selectively ignoring God’s omnipotence in favor of omniscience.As I stated earlier, it doesn't matter whether he disregards or selectively ignores his omniscience. The omniscience IS the problem. It is antithetical to free will by definition.
Here's your proof...you produce a tv show. You have the script which gives you foreknowledge of everything that's going to happen in the show. That's omniscience. The show gets made but you never read the script. You ignore it. You disregard it. You have no idea what's going to happen. When you watch the show, can it radically change from the script? If the script says the characters spectacularly fail, can they "choose" to NOT fail during the show? Do they have free will?
It doesn't matter whether you exercise your option to look ahead or not. The show will play out exactly as scripted. Period.
Most scholars put it between 80-90. And there is a growing group of scholars advocating for a later date. Some conservative scholars advocate for an early date in the 60s.Acts was definitely before 70 and likely before 62 since no mention of James’s martyrdom.
Christians agree the church began in the day of Pentecost (so early 30’s).
This is actually not true. The Jewish revolt and subsequent destruction of Jerusalem is well known to occur in AD70. Acts makes no mention. This is how we know it was written before AD70. Then there are other events (like mentioned earlier) known to take earlier that Acts also doesn’t mention pushing the date to the early 60’s.Most scholars put it between 80-90. And there is a growing group of scholars advocating for a later date. Some conservative scholars advocate for an early date in the 60s.
So this god can make a rock so heavy that he can't possibly lift it? That's where omnipotence takes you - just another mutually exclusive conundrum. You really haven't solved one omni-problem by invoking another.Me thinks you are selectively ignoring God’s omnipotence in favor of omniscience.
God can create anything, including a world where free-will is compatible with His omniscience.
Simply put, God can know the outcome of an infinite amount of choices. But you still have choice.
Pretend you are driving towards a solid concrete wall and are getting close:
- If you choose to drive 100mph into that solid concrete wall, God knows the outcome of your horrific smashing death along with the subsequent outcomes resulting from your choice (mainly, your wife cursing your name till she dies and how she ends up marrying your insurance guy).
- If you choose to drive only 10mph into that solid concrete wall, God knows that your car will suffer a little damage and your head will bump the steering wheel. He knows you will have a mild headache for a few hours and knows that your wife will nag you for eternity for being dumb enough to drive into a wall.
God knows both outcomes (and all related subsequent outcomes) simultaneously. You still get to choose and God knows exactly what happens.
Gods Omnipotence should not be ignored when talking about His Omniscience.
God can’t do anything that are logically contradictory (make square circles and the like).So this god can make a rock so heavy that he can't possibly lift it? That's where omnipotence takes you - just another mutually exclusive conundrum. You really haven't solved one omni-problem by invoking another.
You just postulated a being who can know every outcome of every minute choice by every living creature in the universe.God can’t do anything that are logically contradictory (make square circles and the like).
So this god can make a rock so heavy that he can't possibly lift it? That's where omnipotence takes you - just another mutually exclusive conundrum. You really haven't solved one omni-problem by invoking another.
God = TruthYou just postulated a being who can know every outcome of every minute choice by every living creature in the universe.
You order a large sausage pizza ma'am?Ezekiel 23 20 "There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys, and whose emission was like that of horses." Now that's writing!!! All scripture is of divine inspiration.
I really feel for those that overthink “almighty”.
Faith helps people. Hope helps people and so does love.
To be obsessed with anything is not healthy.
Everyone has their own tenets and beliefs. We should leave it at that.
The beauty of the Ottoman Empire for a period of time was that they encouraged education, and they welcomed all religions.
They all live peacefully for a time
Then guess what happened?