christainity depends the bible being historic factural

[Ingledsva]

I didn't say it was his desire. They were expecting a Sacred King & Warrior King.

The verses show that what I said was correct. - The Hebrew Messiah was seen as Spiritual King and Warrior King.

Let's see if we can piece together what we agree on and clarify what we disagree on;

First of all I agree with what the Jews were expecting as you have described it here, I think we completely agree on what the Jews expected.

As I understand it you are making 2 points.

1. Jesus is a sacred (ie spiritual?) King.

I think we are basically agreed on this if I understand your first point.

2. Jesus is a warrior (King).
Now where I understand that we disagree is that you say (assuming I read your statement correctly) Jesus was a literal warrior, such that He would carry a metal sword, and use it to cut people in battle.

I agree that Jesus is a warrior, but not a literal warrior, for the battles Jesus engaged in where the battles of wisdom and utterance, and His sword, the sharp words of His tongue whith which He divided the faithful from the unfaithful. He was a spiritual warrior.

Consider the psalms for example;
(Psalms 57:3-4) "God shall send forth his mercy and his truth.

My soul is among lions: and I lie even among them that are set on fire, even the sons of men, whose teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword."

This was my point with regard to Jesus not being a literalist, the Gospel does not indicate that Jesus agreed with Jewish literalist expectations regarding a warrior.

(Ephesians 6:17) "And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God"

(John 18:10-11) "Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.

Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath"

Obviously a literal warrior would not be instructing His followers to pack away physical weapons at the approach of the enemy.

Actually I said the Hebrew were expecting a Sacred King & Warrior King. He was to bring the end times.

Several scholars have noted connection with a couple of his follower's names having to do with "thugs," and they obviously packed short swords, which are used for in-close hand-to-hand fighting. Jesus and his crew apparently had to duck out and run a couple of times after his fiery rants, and he attacked people in the Temple court. According to Revelation -

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
Rev 19:12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
Rev 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
Rev 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
Rev 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
Rev 19:17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
Rev 19:18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.
Rev 19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.


I would say that to them he was both - Warrior King/Spiritual King.


*

 

[danieldemol]

Actually I said the Hebrew were expecting a Sacred King & Warrior King. He was to bring the end times.

Several scholars have noted connection with a couple of his follower's names having to do with "thugs,"

I have to honestly say that you are not providing enough detail here, and if you are referring to the work of scholars, why not cite your sources and explain what their relevant qualifications are.

and they obviously packed short swords, which are used for in-close hand-to-hand fighting.

This is true of Jesus followers who held the same literal fulfillment expectations as the Jews did. We saw in the episode with Peter, where Jesus opposed Peter's expectations. Do you know of references to Jesus carrying a metal sword?

Jesus and his crew apparently had to duck out and run a couple of times after his fiery rants,

Rants as in words (ie using the sword of His tongue)?

and he attacked people in the Temple court.

Citation required, did Jesus attack people with words, and push over gambling tables, or was there a sword fight?

According to Revelation -

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

Keep in mind that it qualifies whether we are talking about a literal war or a spiritual war in this passage you quoted;

Rev 19:12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns;

A person can't literally wear many crowns at the same time.

the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

Keep in mind that white horses were owned by the wealthy, while Jesus could not afford a home and had to borrow just to get 1 donkey, where do you think such poor folk who spent there entire lives on foot got the money for an armies' worth of white horses?

Keep in mind it also says the armies were in heaven, read that literally and the armies where either physically in the sky or physically dead.

Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword

A literal sharp sword coming out of the mouth? Come on, surely that is a reference to the word of God which the scriptures repeatedly refer to as a sharp sword. Do you need a reference from the Biblical chapter of Hebrews for that? I'm happy to provide it.

 

[Thief]

As I said the Hebrew writing have him as also a warrior.

In addition he is called King of Kings.

Interestingly, we also have this -

Joh 6:14 Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that one foretold that should come into the world.
Joh 6:15 When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.

They decided he was the prophesized Messiah, and wanted to make him a King.

.

And His own disciples came asking position in the kingdom....to His right and left.
He said to them first...
You do not understand what you ask.

They insisted pledging deeds as He would do...and to drink from the same cup as He would.

He said to them ...yeah....You say as I say and do as I do.....for that
you shall drink from the same cup that I shall drink from.

But as for who will sit at my right...and to my left.....
That is not Mine to give.

So!....what kind of king cannot choose from His own following? ....
Place them as He sees fit.....
Not even those two positions most readily controlled?

WHAT KIND OF AUTHORITY IS THAT!
Such things not His to give.

Of Himself He did say....brother and fellow servant.

And would it not be better to have your Brother's Hand on your shoulder?
than to kneel before a warrior king and His judgment.

 

[Ingledsva]

And His own disciples came asking position in the kingdom....to His right and left.
He said to them first...
You do not understand what you ask.

They insisted pledging deeds as He would do...and to drink from the same cup as He would.

He said to them ...yeah....You say as I say and do as I do.....for that
you shall drink from the same cup that I shall drink from.

But as for who will sit at my right...and to my left.....
That is not Mine to give.

So!....what kind of king cannot choose from His own following? ....
Place them as He sees fit.....
Not even those two positions most readily controlled?

WHAT KIND OF AUTHORITY IS THAT!
Such things not His to give.

Of Himself He did say....brother and fellow servant.

And would it not be better to have your Brother's Hand on your shoulder?
than to kneel before a warrior king and His judgment.

You need to put in the verse numbers so I can see what the verses actually say.

However, to start, HE ISN"T GOD.

Even Kings and Warriors follow a plan.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Actually I said the Hebrew were expecting a Sacred King & Warrior King. He was to bring the end times.

Several scholars have noted connection with a couple of his follower's names having to do with "thugs,"

I have to honestly say that you are not providing enough detail here, and if you are referring to the work of scholars, why not cite your sources and explain what their relevant qualifications are.

For instance - Simon was a Zealot. Look them up. They opposed Roman rule and did as much hit and run damage as they could.

And Judas Iscariot's name is noted by some to probably come from Sicarius. The Sicarii were "dagger-Men."

You can read a little more about these groups at -
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0021_0_21428.html

and they obviously packed short swords, which are used for in-close hand-to-hand fighting.

This is true of Jesus followers who held the same literal fulfillment expectations as the Jews did. We saw in the episode with Peter, where Jesus opposed Peter's expectations. Do you know of references to Jesus carrying a metal sword?

We know they packed swords as several verses say so. The fact that it doesn't specifically say Jesus did - doesn't mean he didn't! They were traveling between cities in areas with thiefs and thugs that attacked travelers.

Jesus and his crew apparently had to duck out and run a couple of times after his fiery rants,

Rants as in words (ie using the sword of His tongue)?

Duck and run as in not so "peaceful and calm" as later people make him out to be.

=Ingledsva]and he attacked people in the Temple court.

Citation required, did Jesus attack people with words, and push over gambling tables, or was there a sword fight?

Boy you are really digging. I didn't say anything about swords there, I am showing that he WAS A REBEL - with a temper - and I might add - armed guards.

How does one do that at the Temple - with all those people - without being grabbed? His Armed followers/guards.

According to Revelation -

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

Keep in mind that it qualifies whether we are talking about a literal war or a spiritual war in this passage you quoted;

A person can't literally wear many crowns at the same time.

I am showing the FACT that they considered the Messiah a Sacred King and Warrior King - before (Tanakh) - during - and after his death.

Keep in mind that white horses were owned by the wealthy, while Jesus could not afford a home and had to borrow just to get 1 donkey, where do you think such poor folk who spent there entire lives on foot got the money for an armies' worth of white horses?

These are supposed to be future events (in this myth) and as such have nothing to do with Jesus having money on earth, or not.

Keep in mind it also says the armies were in heaven, read that literally and the armies where either physically in the sky or physically dead.

See above. And it would make no difference, as they wrote about him as BOTH.

I might add, again - that this whole thing is myth - and that most Christians are expecting him to literally come back as described, and bring about the last days.

In this "myth" what are you thinking? That Jesus and army dressed for war - just show up in the clouds - no further - and people just fall dead? NOT! That doesn't make for a good story line.

Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword

A literal sharp sword coming out of the mouth? Come on, surely that is a reference to the word of God which the scriptures repeatedly refer to as a sharp sword. Do you need a reference from the Biblical chapter of Hebrews for that? I'm happy to provide it.

Again - you are really digging here - taking things out of context.

The whole quote was given to show they thought of him as the awaited Messiah - who was both Spiritual King and Warrior King - and who is to bring the end times.

*

 

[Thief]

You need to put in the verse numbers so I can see what the verses actually say.

However, to start, HE ISN"T GOD.

Even Kings and Warriors follow a plan.

*

I didn't say He was God.
That's another thread....somewhere else going on.

And He was neither king or warrior.

 

[Ingledsva]

You need to put in the verse numbers so I can see what the verses actually say.

However, to start, HE ISN"T GOD.

Even Kings and Warriors follow a plan.

I didn't say He was God.
That's another thread....somewhere else going on.

Actually that was in context to your post. You said -

...But as for who will sit at my right...and to my left.....
That is not Mine to give.

So!....what kind of king cannot choose from His own following? ....
Place them as He sees fit.....

I said "HE ISN'T GOD."

He is supposed to be sent from God for a purpose - His meaning - IN THAT VERSE - is most likely - only God can decide that.

And He was neither king or warrior.

LOL! He is supposed to be the awaited Hebrew Messiah! As stated -

That would make him Sacred King & Warrior King to fulfill those prophecies.
He is called King in the NT.
And they believe he is coming back as the prophesied Warrior King.

*

 

[Thief]

Actually that was in context to your post. You said -



I said "HE ISN'T GOD."

He is supposed to be sent from God for a purpose - His meaning - IN THAT VERSE - is most likely - only God can decide that.



LOL! He is supposed to be the awaited Hebrew Messiah! As stated -

That would make him Sacred King & Warrior King to fulfill those prophecies.
He is called King in the NT.
And they believe he is coming back as the prophesied Warrior King.

*

Everyone around Him wanted a Jewish king on a Jewish throne.

The discussion went to the Romans.
Insurrection was the charge dealt.

A false accusation.
He never wanted a crown on His head.

 

[Ingledsva]

Actually that was in context to your post. You said -



I said "HE ISN'T GOD."

He is supposed to be sent from God for a purpose - His meaning - IN THAT VERSE - is most likely - only God can decide that.



LOL! He is supposed to be the awaited Hebrew Messiah! As stated -

That would make him Sacred King & Warrior King to fulfill those prophecies.
He is called King in the NT.
And they believe he is coming back as the prophesied Warrior King.

Everyone around Him wanted a Jewish king on a Jewish throne.

The discussion went to the Romans.
Insurrection was the charge dealt.

A false accusation.
He never wanted a crown on His head.

Indeed they wanted the prophecy which has him as both. And AGAIN - the FULL New Testament MYTH - has him as both.

Insurrection means an open revolt against the civil authority. Technically he does fit in this category. And don't forget he has Zealots among his personal twelve.

*

 

[yoda89]

You are not going to convince any Christians that our scriptures are fake, including me.

What about the not too nice ones. The ones about slavery, stoning people, killing your enemies, killing their babies. If they are real then why not follow them all. If all the scriptures are real. But if you only follow some that is rejecting certain parts. Cherry picking and denying some passages. Which makes it not real.

Kill Babies=Real
Ignore Parts about killing babies, Cherry picking and denying parts thus=Unreal

A loving God has no need to kill babies. Because the bible claims us all to be his children.

Welcome to believe what you want. However as people receive more education. They realize its illogical and harmful. That they don't need the bible to be good people and stop fearing to live their life according to a book. Good people are good people without a book or even the act of killing a man.

The following of a 2000 year old outdated book is slowing. One that is full of contradictions. The verses hidden including those of his childhood. In my opinion its a dying religion. It will not fully cease. It will be believed by some. But by most Jesus will go alongside Hercules as myth.

Thus as more people begin to question they will realize the bible is not historically accurate.

But that's my ignorant opinion and two cents

 

[sojourner]

What about the not too nice ones. The ones about slavery, stoning people, killing your enemies, killing their babies. If they are real then why not follow them all. If all the scriptures are real. But if you only follow some that is rejecting certain parts. Cherry picking and denying some passages. Which makes it not real.

Jesus weighed scripture all the time. Everyone weighs scripture. That's the only responsible way to treat widely diverse texts. What is culturally true for one culture is not particularly true for another, and to take such culturally-imbedded texts at "face value" is to treat them irresponsibly.

However as people receive more education. They realize its illogical and harmful.

As people receive more education they realize that their perspectives of the bible as "illogical" and "harmful" are puerile and misinformed.

Thus as more people begin to question they will realize the bible is not historically accurate.

We've known for quite some time that the bible isn't historically-accurate with regard to the details of its reporting.

that's my ignorant opinion

This is the only accurate part of your post.

 

[yoda89]

Jesus weighed scripture all the time. Everyone weighs scripture. That's the only responsible way to treat widely diverse texts. What is culturally true for one culture is not particularly true for another, and to take such culturally-imbedded texts at "face value" is to treat them irresponsibly.

Jesus couldn't have weighed scripture? It was written decades after he was dead. A book being a culturally-imbedded texts in no way gives it a get out of free jail card. If this text were to be written today we would dismiss it and laugh at it. The words in the scriptures are the very reason we should question it. If you have read all of the verses and call it irresponsibility to oppose such claims then you are for killing in the name of something Unless you choose to cheery pick and ignore the violent ones. Which in case of course makes them magically disappear.

As people receive more education they realize that their perspectives of the bible as "illogical" and "harmful" are puerile and misinformed.

So as people become more intelligent and informed they should not be able to decide which is logically and harmful. They see the fairy tales of Moses and man who was dead for 3 days. They see good people doing evil acts in the name or a 2000 year outdated book. It's losing on all fronts. Even those with spirituality have thought out reasonable explanations for their beliefs.

We've known for quite some time that the bible isn't historically-accurate with regard to the details of its reporting.

I didn't realize it was so outdated. Is it the how to keep slaves or a man being crucified to make a point. If you claim it to be outdated and something's are false then it makes even some of the bible false. If the bible is the word of god and part of his word is false. Then he is a liar or untrue according to Christianity. Or maybe it was just clever 4 regular guys wanted to write fables.

This is the only accurate part of your post.

Have you ever seen the movie dogma? You might want to look up Carlins beliefs first.

The point here is that many wish to ignore the parts they do not like. It has been so culturally imbedded that we are made feel bad to question such matters. This should not be a cause to not analyze all of the book.

[youtube]6FigprdcBGA[/youtube]
Dogma - Buddy Christ (George Carlin) - YouTube

 

[Thief]

[/i]


Indeed they wanted the prophecy which has him as both. And AGAIN - the FULL New Testament MYTH - has him as both.

Insurrection means an open revolt against the civil authority. Technically he does fit in this category. And don't forget he has Zealots among his personal twelve.

*

That was the charge....and false accusation.
In prophecy the Son of God would place Judea on high.
a Jewish king on a Jewish throne.

He was no such thing and wanted no part of it.

When His disciples placed their swords on His Last Supper table...
they asked.....are these enough.

He said......'It is enough.'

He got up.....and walked out.

 

[ChristineES]

Christian faith is dependent upon the bible being a historic fact.

1. Jesus was crucified...and died for our sins
2. Jesus raised himself from the dead.
3. Jesus was deity

Christianity cannot be a philosophy like Buddhism...because Christianity
depends upon that Jesus dying on the cross and raising himself from the dead is
a historic fact.

Christianity arguments start with biblical archeology. Historian research of ancient document (where ordinary people do not read material of this kind).

I have been thinking about this. As a Christian, I have to believe what the Gospels say about Jesus being a real person and all that in the Christian scriptures (what I used to call the NT). As for the Tanakh (what is what I used to call the OT) it doesn't have to be literal. I've watched archeology shows about how they are getting closer and closer to proving that King David exists, but they haven't proved it yet. As for the creation story, Adam and Eve, and possibly the flood story, they appear to be allegorical (parables).
It doesn't take away from the truths of the Bible if one doesn't take a particular book or story literally.

 

[Ingledsva]

Indeed they wanted the prophecy which has him as both. And AGAIN - the FULL New Testament MYTH - has him as both.

Insurrection means an open revolt against the civil authority. Technically he does fit in this category. And don't forget he has Zealots among his personal twelve.

That was the charge....and false accusation.
In prophecy the Son of God would place Judea on high.
a Jewish king on a Jewish throne.

He was no such thing and wanted no part of it.

When His disciples placed their swords on His Last Supper table...
they asked.....are these enough.

He said......'It is enough.'

He got up.....and walked out.

1. You need to read up on what the Hebrew people were expecting.

2. Wanting is not the same as getting.

3, however, as stated several times (in this Christian NT story) they have brought in both sides with the Sacred King on earth, and the returning Warrior King at the end.

*

 

[Thief]

1. You need to read up on what the Hebrew people were expecting.

2. Wanting is not the same as getting.

3, however, as stated several times (in this Christian NT story) they have brought in both sides with the Sacred King on earth, and the returning Warrior King at the end.

*

Indeed.
And the terms can be turned about at will.
One of the reasons I don't practice dogmatic religion.

A bit more focus on the quotes of the Carpenter and you will see.
He had no political ambition.
Right from the moment of His fasting in the wilderness....
He would turn down every offer of a crown.

Shall we now digress to personal expectations?

 

[Ingledsva]

1. You need to read up on what the Hebrew people were expecting.

2. Wanting is not the same as getting.

3, however, as stated several times (in this Christian NT story) they have brought in both sides with the Sacred King on earth, and the returning Warrior King at the end.

Indeed.
And the terms can be turned about at will.
One of the reasons I don't practice dogmatic religion.

A bit more focus on the quotes of the Carpenter and you will see.
He had no political ambition.
Right from the moment of His fasting in the wilderness....
He would turn down every offer of a crown.

Shall we now digress to personal expectations?

You don't seem to understand what I am saying.

1.The Hebrew expected a messiah with certain prophecies.
2. The Christian story wants us to believe Jesus is real - and THE PROPHESIED MESSIAH.
3. If so he has to fit the prophecies of BOTH Spiritual and Warrior King.
4. We know that we don't have all of the stories about him, but that is beside the point - as they try to fulfill the prophesy by having him a Spiritual King on earth - and coming back as the sword in hand warrior King.

*

 

[Thief]

You don't seem to understand what I am saying.

1.The Hebrew expected a messiah with certain prophecies.
2. The Christian story wants us to believe Jesus is real - and THE PROPHESIED MESSIAH.
3. If so he has to fit the prophecies of BOTH Spiritual and Warrior King.
4. We know that we don't have all of the stories about him, but that is beside the point - as they try to fulfill the prophesy by having him a Spiritual King on earth - and coming back as the sword in hand warrior King.

*

I understand the confusion.
The Jews wanted a king on earth....Judea on high.
The early Christians wanted the same....but without the Pharisees or Romans in charge.

And here we are centuries later still kicking the idea back and forth.

Of Himself He did say....brother and fellow servant.
And He never wanted a crown on His head.
And He told His disciples the kingdom is not of this world.

I suppose....you are seeking judgment?
Would that be for you?
Or unto all others that do not agree?

 

[allright]

I have been thinking about this. As a Christian, I have to believe what the Gospels say about Jesus being a real person and all that in the Christian scriptures (what I used to call the NT). As for the Tanakh (what is what I used to call the OT) it doesn't have to be literal. I've watched archeology shows about how they are getting closer and closer to proving that King David exists, but they haven't proved it yet. As for the creation story, Adam and Eve, and possibly the flood story, they appear to be allegorical (parables).
It doesn't take away from the truths of the Bible if one doesn't take a particular book or story literally.

Jesus said that the flood and Noah were real events and used them as an example of the end times
You say they may be allegorical. So your saying maybe Jesus is a liar or you know whats true better then he does ?

 

[fantome profane]

Jesus said that the flood and Noah were real events and used them as an example of the end times
You say they may be allegorical. So your saying maybe Jesus is a liar or you know whats true better then he does ?

But we don't actually know that Jesus said any of those things. We only know that authors writing decades after his death, who had never met him, report that he said these things.