• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

First time hearing about the Virgin Mary

K

kalyan

Aspiring Sri VaishNava
Anyone who believe virgins can give birth is stupid...very weak.....also isn't mary wife of yesus
 
Yoshua

Yoshua

Well-Known Member
Kelly of the Phoenix said:
I understand who Jesus was. He was a messenger of Truth sent by God. "Son of God" is a label, as is "Messiah". None of them actually require divinity. I don't hold John or Paul to be very useful to spirituality. Jesus' message was how to "be the miracle" as Bruce Almighty put it. Paul and John want us to focus on our heavenly rewards, which is a bit self-absorbed IMHO. We all have access to God, being omnipresent and all. Granted, some people lack neural setups in their brains to feel "divinely inspired" or whatever, but just because the radio doesn't work doesn't mean the message ain't floating around. In dreams/visions I've met God several times (sometimes strictly to hear a lecture, LOL). I can no longer engage in idolatry. Even if one is Trinitarian, I'm willing to cut it some slack, but an over-reliance on Paul and John will merely ensure people who are only interested in their own benefits. Look at fundamentalists: they almost exclusively quote from these two people and have the audacity to tell us to "read the WHOLE bible". Jesus told us to let our light shine, not hide it. If only Jesus is light, then how could he claim this?
edit:
Click to expand...
Hi Kelly,

I respect your opinion about Paul and John. Our light will shine to others because of Jesus for we don't have light in the first place. For me, spirituality should be balance in terms of application about Paul's and John's message. I look these two apostles as the servant of Christ who faithfully followed Christ's teachings. No wonder why Jesus chose them to be His disciples. There is no reason why Jesus would not choose them. This is to propagate Christ's ministry.

Thanks
 
Yoshua

Yoshua

Well-Known Member
outhouse said:
Josephus was heavily edited regarding Jesus, and the church was the one to hold and edit much of it. Not all has been edited, and we think some of the writing is original.
Click to expand...
Hi Outhouse,

This is the external test for the New Testament pertaining to Jesus Christ existed. Flavius Josephus is a Jewish historian that lived during the time of Jesus (A.D. 37-100). There are a lot of writings collection from Antiquities Book I to book 20. He has also Wars Book (history of the destruction of Jerusalem). Jesus is not a myth.

CHAPTER 3.

SEDITION OF THE JEWS AGAINST PONTIUS PILATE. CONCERNING CHRIST, AND WHAT BEFELL PAULINA AND THE JEWS AT ROME,

3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.Antiquities XVIII.3.3 from early Jewish writings

Thanks
 
outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
Yoshua said:
Jesus is not a myth
Click to expand...

You have very little education on this topic my friend. I fight some of the top mythicist out there, trying to promote the evidence that shows he did exist.

In other words, I think he was real. But one thing is certain as fact, biblical jesus is not historical jesus.
 
outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
Augustus said:
Which of the "top mythicists" do you fight? Where would one go to witness such high-level scholarly debates?
Click to expand...

The board was moved that has my older debates with Earl Doherty, and he is not posting anymore online, age and health and Carrier ran with his original idea. Weak garbage anyway.
You can go to earlychristianwritings forum.

Neil Godfrey used to post all time from Vridar, still there off and on

AchyraS has a pseudo name

Carriers minions are there.

Stephen Huller, author post daily.


Peter Kirby is on the fence

And many different professors and scholar go in and out.

I tried to get Candida Moss to join, and I don't blame her for not.


Just so you know. Jaywalker soule here, use to debate Carrier there 5-10 years before I joined there.
 
Yoshua

Yoshua

Well-Known Member
outhouse said:
You have very little education on this topic my friend. I fight some of the top mythicist out there, trying to promote the evidence that shows he did exist.

In other words, I think he was real. But one thing is certain as fact, biblical jesus is not historical jesus.
Click to expand...
Hi Outhouse,

I don't agree biblical Jesus is not historical Jesus, He is still the Jesus that is historical.

Thanks
 
Yoshua

Yoshua

Well-Known Member
outhouse said:
We don't know that. Mary M could have been.
Click to expand...
Oh. Mary Magdalene is not the wife of Jesus. This concept was sourced from the Gnostic gospels (non-canonical), Gospel of Philip. This account is contradictory with the New Testament narratives about Mary Magdalene and Jesus Christ.

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top