I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh to the Father but by me. (John 10:9, 14:6)

[Kelvin.Max]

That Jesus is God in the flesh is key and central to our Christian belief, which makes Christianity different to other Abrahamic religions.

According to Christians, the centrality of Christ goes without saying; which is why they believe Jesus is far more important than any other central figure in Islam and Judaism.

Given that this is a key tenet in Christianity, why do some Christians deny the critical role of Jesus as the Son of God who will be God's lawful and supreme judge on the day of Final Reckoning?

Is it for fear that some Christians will deny the key article of faith that Jesus will have power and authority to send God's enemies and sinful people to eternal destruction on the day of judgement? (Revelation 20:15).

You may not like or approve of what I've said, but what are you going to do about it?

Or perhaps you should abandon Christianity for some other religion -- because no Christian can ever deny the key and critical role of Jesus as gate keeper to God's kingdom? (John 5:22-23, 5:27-30, 10:9, 14:6; Revelation 20:11-15).

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Without the great pics, this thread would really stink.

 

[InChrist]

I don't like the pictures too much, except the first two with the scripture quotes, but the thread certainly is in line with the most important point of the biblical scriptures which I believe is the revelation of Jesus Christ as the Savior, Judge, and only mediator between humanity and God.
It may be fear of men, rather than God , or pride which causes some who claim to be Christians to deny this central truth of God's Word.

 

[Ingledsva]

That Jesus is God in the flesh is key and central to our Christian belief, which makes Christianity different to other Abrahamic religions.
...

No it isn't central to Christian belief!

No Christian has to believe Jesus is God, - and many don't!

The Bible does NOT say Jesus is God.

Jesus doesn't say he is God! He never says he is part of a trinity! Odd things for him to leave out if they were true, - don't you think?

There is no trinity in the Bible.

These are later traditions of man, - and you know what Jesus said about "traditions of Man!"

*

 

[redpolk]

That Jesus is God in the flesh is key and central to our Christian belief, which makes Christianity different to other Abrahamic religions.

According to Christians, the centrality of Christ goes without saying; which is why they believe Jesus is far more important than any other central figure in Islam and Judaism.

Given that this is a key tenet in Christianity, why do some Christians deny the critical role of Jesus as the Son of God who will be God's lawful and supreme judge on the day of Final Reckoning?

Is it for fear that some Christians will deny the key article of faith that Jesus will have power and authority to send God's enemies and sinful people to eternal destruction on the day of judgement? (Revelation 20:15).

You may not like or approve of what I've said, but what are you going to do about it?

Or perhaps you should abandon Christianity for some other religion -- because no Christian can ever deny the key and critical role of Jesus as gate keeper to God's kingdom? (John 5:22-23, 5:27-30, 10:9, 14:6; Revelation 20:11-15).

View attachment 6664
View attachment 6665
View attachment 6666
View attachment 6667
View attachment 6669
View attachment 6670
View attachment 6671

In my experience,many modern Christians are seeking to understand what the historical Jesus actually taught.This historical approach is more nuanced and can be more intellectually satisfying but it can raise questions more traditional Christians prefer not to think about.It is not fear but a desire to use their God-given minds to the fullest.

 

[Adstar]

That Jesus is God in the flesh is key and central to our Christian belief, which makes Christianity different to other Abrahamic religions.

According to Christians, the centrality of Christ goes without saying; which is why they believe Jesus is far more important than any other central figure in Islam and Judaism.

Given that this is a key tenet in Christianity, why do some Christians deny the critical role of Jesus as the Son of God who will be God's lawful and supreme judge on the day of Final Reckoning?

Is it for fear that some Christians will deny the key article of faith that Jesus will have power and authority to send God's enemies and sinful people to eternal destruction on the day of judgement? (Revelation 20:15).

You may not like or approve of what I've said, but what are you going to do about it?

Or perhaps you should abandon Christianity for some other religion -- because no Christian can ever deny the key and critical role of Jesus as gate keeper to God's kingdom? (John 5:22-23, 5:27-30, 10:9, 14:6; Revelation 20:11-15).

A lot of christians are not Christians.

A lot of people have slowly modified their religion to make it fit the worlds fads to the point of turning their religion into a religion not worth following.

One people start denying aspects of their faith so as to make themselves more acceptable to an unbelieving world it is only a matter of time before they are denying the core slavational doctrines of the faith.

 

[fantome profane]

That Jesus is God in the flesh is key and central to our Christian belief, which makes Christianity different to other Abrahamic religions. ...

One thing that has always puzzled me. If this is such an important point, if this is the central message to the ministry of Jesus, if this is what he preached during his life, then why do three out of the four gospels not mention this? You would think that they would. If it were true.

 

[Imaginary_Friends]

Every time I see this picture it always remind me of that scene at the end of the Beetlejuice movie.

 

[Kelvin.Max]

One thing that has always puzzled me. If this is such an important point, if this is the central message to the ministry of Jesus, if this is what he preached during his life, then why do three out of the four gospels not mention this? You would think that they would. If it were true.

Argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition is true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so.

Because three out of four gospels do not mention this doesn't imply that they're 'right'; nor does it serve to contradict or undermine what is mentioned in John 10:9, 14:6.

As indeed, the fact they don't mention this doesn't mean that three out of four gospels have specifically rejected such a tenet. Failure to mention this doesn't imply they either rejected or endorsed such a tenet.

Fact is, there is no evidence that Matthew, Mark, and Luke would have rejected such a point; and thereby, no evidence of the gospels contradicting one another over such a key tenet.

The only problem would be the existence of logical contradictions; of which there is none regarding such a tenet.

 

[fantome profane]

Argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition is true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so.

Because three out of four gospels do not mention this doesn't imply that they're 'right'; nor does it serve to contradict or undermine what is mentioned in John 10:9, 14:6.

As indeed, the fact they don't mention this doesn't mean that three out of four gospels have specifically rejected such a tenet. Failure to mention this doesn't imply they either rejected or endorsed such a tenet.

Fact is, there is no evidence that Matthew, Mark, and Luke would have rejected such a point; and thereby, no evidence of the gospels contradicting one another over such a key tenet.

The only problem would be the existence of logical contradictions; of which there is none regarding such a tenet.

That really doesn't answer my question. If you were writing about some one who claimed to be "God", would you not mention that he claimed to be "God"? It would be very strange to write about someone who claimed to be "God" and not mention it. And it would be incredibly strange if you were writing about someone who you actually believed was "God" and not still not mention that.

 

[seeking4truth]

When he spoke no doubt that Jesus was the one to follow if you wanted to get to God. Everything Jesus said directed people to God. He himself prayed to God, worshiped Him and followed the rules of the Torah. It was to turn the people back to this that he came and that is why he called himself the way, the light etc.
I don't know any reference which says that he would still be that after he died. He also said he came to guide the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Where did he claim to be the guide for the whole of mankind?

 

[idea]

It's too bad so many misrepresent Jesus... I suppose no one completely knows him, but what we do have from him? like the sermon on the mount? that's incredible stuff.

 

[nazz]

Without the great pics, this thread would really stink.

I never knew people wore clothes before jumping into hell

 

[Sand Dancer]

John was the only gospel where Jesus say this. It was also the last one written and the most embellished. There is a reason it's not one of the synoptic gospels.

 

[Kelvin.Max]

John was the only gospel where Jesus say this. It was also the last one written and the most embellished. There is a reason it's not one of the synoptic gospels.

Embellishment are not sufficient grounds to completely discredit nor refute religious belief; because there is no way to know whether John 5:22-23, 5:27-30, 10:9, 14:6 is 'true' or not. Such lines are simply a matter of faith, which cannot be scientifically falsified/verified.

The fact that Matthew, Mark, and Luke have fewer embellishments, which are written in ancient biographical format doesn't imply that such 'biographical' claims are to be accepted as more reliable than such verses in John.

NOTE: John was a Theologian, and wrote at a much higher level than the Synoptic Gospels were written in. They used Koine Greek - basically Street Greek. John's writing was much more complex.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Embellishment are not sufficient grounds to completely discredit nor refute religious belief; because there is no way to know whether John 5:22-23, 5:27-30, 10:9, 14:6 is 'true' or not. Such lines are simply a matter of faith, which cannot be scientifically falsified/verified.

The fact that Matthew, Mark, and Luke have fewer embellishments, which are written in ancient biographical format doesn't imply that such 'biographical' claims are to be accepted as more reliable than such verses in John.

NOTE: John was a Theologian, and wrote at a much higher level than the Synoptic Gospels were written in. They used Koine Greek - basically Street Greek. John's writing was much more complex.

The longer the time since Jesus was alive, the less accurate stories get. Societal influences affect accuracy of memory.

 

[Kelvin.Max]

The longer the time since Jesus was alive, the less accurate stories get. Societal influences affect accuracy of memory.

So then, are you saying that John is relatively more recent than Matthew, Mark, and Luke?

 

[Robert.Evans]

No it isn't central to Christian belief!

You have a point... though it is part of the theology.

No Christian has to believe Jesus is God, - and many don't!

But we must ask who he is... and that seems the best answer

The Bible does NOT say Jesus is God.

Yes is does. John 20 Hebrews 1

Jesus doesn't say he is God!

He had to make himself least.. so he could not

He never says he is part of a trinity!

See above

Odd things for him to leave out if they were true, - don't you think?

no. This is scripture you speak of and is understood esoterically

There is no trinity in the Bible.

Yes there is even if the word is not used.

These are later traditions of man, - and you know what Jesus said about "traditions of Man!"

*

He also said what is bound on earth will be bound in heaven

 

[Robert.Evans]

One thing that has always puzzled me. If this is such an important point, if this is the central message to the ministry of Jesus, if this is what he preached during his life, then why do three out of the four gospels not mention this? You would think that they would. If it were true.

It is esoteric

 

[Robert.Evans]

When he spoke no doubt that Jesus was the one to follow if you wanted to get to God. Everything Jesus said directed people to God. He himself prayed to God, worshiped Him and followed the rules of the Torah. It was to turn the people back to this that he came and that is why he called himself the way, the light etc.
I don't know any reference which says that he would still be that after he died. He also said he came to guide the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Where did he claim to be the guide for the whole of mankind?

Paul went to the Gentiles. We are told that he is the God of the Gentiles also. Yisrael is by the fractal action of the evolving conscious, also mankind, the world