Recommended Posts
...As for your statement I haven't proved myself. It's all verifiable from multiple sources, including my family, government documentation, profesional wrestling fans, historians. In otherwords, far more primary sources than Jesus has available to him - whether you want to play the proof game or not...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
In just a few hundred years will any of these "sources" still be around? If people want to attempt to prove your alleged existence, what sources will they claim? And how will these sources be interpreted as being more credible than the sources describing the life of Jesus?
I believe that nobody will question the claim of your existence, because, by proving you really DID exist, this has no personal long-term ramifications for anyone who might believe in or reject you.
The reason people fight so hard to deny Christ is because, if He really is God, then they are obligated to either respond to Him or suffer consequences they don't want to believe could be possible.
Believing in Alex will carry no ramifications other than the ability to listen to some cool music.
Cheers,
Jon S.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
In just a few hundred years will any of these "sources" still be around? If people want to attempt to prove your alleged existence, what sources will they claim? And how will these sources be interpreted as being more credible than the sources describing the life of Jesus?
I believe that nobody will question the claim of your existence, because, by proving you really DID exist, this has no personal long-term ramifications for anyone who might believe in or reject you.
The reason people fight so hard to deny Christ is because, if He really is God, then they are obligated to either respond to Him or suffer consequences they don't want to believe could be possible.
Believing in Alex will carry no ramifications other than the ability to listen to some cool music.
Cheers,
Jon S.
Youre changing your argument.
If you stop moving your target i'll answer you.
And you're wrong as to why people ignore God. It's not just one reason. if you stopped oversimplifying it then you might be able to do what He asked and spread the good news a little more effectively....hmmmmmm?
TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.
If you stop moving your target i'll answer you.
And you're wrong as to why people ignore God. It's not just one reason. if you stopped oversimplifying it then you might be able to do what He asked and spread the good news a little more effectively....hmmmmmm?
TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.
beowulf 1
If you search hard enough you will always find what you are looking for, whether it is actually there or not.
Faith is not a very objective way to begin any search.
Faith is not a very objective way to begin any search.
There is a comprehenssive description of what Jesus looked like, physical features.
If you had a scale from 1 to 10, and 10 was the most handsome person, Jesus Christ would be between a 1 and a 2.
Bill Cole
If you had a scale from 1 to 10, and 10 was the most handsome person, Jesus Christ would be between a 1 and a 2.
Bill Cole
Hey look at me! look at me!
Over here!
TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.
Over here!
TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.
rehmwa 2
QuoteHey look at me! look at me!
Over here!
What?! where? I hear something, what's going on, am I missing something? something is happening? hello? Hello?
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
beowulf 1
ha ha LOL that is very funny. Beauty is very subjective. Just because you think this "comprehensive description" of Jesus is not very attractive doesn't necessarily mean that someone else does. Just because somwhere there is a written description of Jesus doesn't mean it is accurate. It could be total fiction. How would you know if it were true?
Because God's WORD says it is. It is a very accurate description, and he looked nothing as He has been depicted.
Looking as He did, it must have made it easier ffor the Jews to have the Romans kill Him, and release Barabas, who likely ( I suppose) was much more acceptable in appearance. It would be hard for them to accept this man as the Son of God, for they would never believe that God would allow His Son to look like he did.
BTW. the desciption was written more than 700 years before Christ was born by the prophet Isaiah.
Bill Cole
Looking as He did, it must have made it easier ffor the Jews to have the Romans kill Him, and release Barabas, who likely ( I suppose) was much more acceptable in appearance. It would be hard for them to accept this man as the Son of God, for they would never believe that God would allow His Son to look like he did.
BTW. the desciption was written more than 700 years before Christ was born by the prophet Isaiah.
Bill Cole
beowulf 1
Ok where specifically is that in the bible. Am I safe to assume it is in the book of Isaiah? If so which verses? I don't remember ever having come across any description of Jesus.
It's not in the bible....
Jesus was rated 2/10 on hotornot.com.
TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.
Jesus was rated 2/10 on hotornot.com.
TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.
It begins with Chapter 52: 13, and ends with chapter 53,verse 12.
Pay particular attention to 52:14:
As many were astonished at thee, his visage (looks) was so marred , more than ANY man, and his form more than the sons of men
53:3 He is dispiosed and rejected of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.and we hid as it were our faces from him, he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Read all the verses mentioned above, and study them.
There is actually more than meets the eys in them, but that is toooo much to try to explain here.
Bill Cole
Pay particular attention to 52:14:
As many were astonished at thee, his visage (looks) was so marred , more than ANY man, and his form more than the sons of men
53:3 He is dispiosed and rejected of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.and we hid as it were our faces from him, he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Read all the verses mentioned above, and study them.
There is actually more than meets the eys in them, but that is toooo much to try to explain here.
Bill Cole
billvon 2,400
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>If you had a scale from 1 to 10, and 10 was the most handsome
>person, Jesus Christ would be between a 1 and a 2.
True. A "slain lamb with seven horns and seven eyes" (as Jesus will appear in the End Days, per Revelation) isn't going to give Brad Pitt a run for his money.
>person, Jesus Christ would be between a 1 and a 2.
True. A "slain lamb with seven horns and seven eyes" (as Jesus will appear in the End Days, per Revelation) isn't going to give Brad Pitt a run for his money.
That slain lamb with seven horns etc is NOT Christ.
Bill Cole
Bill Cole
For instance, you don't know if I once studied, went to church, talked to God, led services, ran discussion groups about the church?
Or that anything else I said is true or false.
Only that the physical existence of someone called Alex Crowley that maps to someone a great deal like myself is clear.
Your question wasnt about online identity, but about documentary evidence about existence - tongue in cheek or not, the illustration was clear.
In fact it could be that Jesus and I laugh regularly together about the stuff we read on these religion threads. After all, why would my (or anyone elses) perception of Jesus be any more of less valid than any other human being - or are religious truths simply hollow popularity contests?
Isnt the truth of the pudding, as they say, in the eating?
But that brings us back to Jesus and sex, and that makes people really feel oogie.
As for your statement I haven't proved myself. It's all verifiable from multiple sources, including my family, government documentation, profesional wrestling fans, historians. In otherwords, far more primary sources than Jesus has available to him - whether you want to play the proof game or not. We could start using the old 'ahhh but you ate cereal X and that has 0.0003 parts hallucinogenic materials in it and under a certain circumstance will cause phantasms'.
It's bullshit, it's evasive and has nothing to do with the original statement. good luck on the CD.
TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites