jesus christ

[dfnj]

I'm not sure what you mean, but "deny" is a rather strange choice of words. It confuses me kinda like the question "why do people deny football?"

Best post of the thread!

 

[syo]

Probably for the same reason that you deny Buddha, Mohammad, Baha'u'llah, Confucius, etc.

all these are people. jesus was also god.

 

[dfnj]

A statement like this would mean you've rejected Yeshua to me... As he didn't come to die for our sins; that is what was made up after by John, Paul, and Simon the stone (petros).

In my opinion.

Okay, this is the best post of the thread.

 

[dfnj]

all these are people. jesus was also god.

Jesus is not God. God is God. Why do you have two words for the same. You just idol worship the words "Jesus Christ" not what the words mean. What the word God means is what I worship.

 

[syo]

There is no love in Christianity. If there were, we would not have so much war and killing of our enemies. How many bombs are we going to drop in the Middle East before people just accept our Christian nation is one of war and hate. Not one of love and forgiveness.

Here's Christian love in action:

More than 200 civilians killed in suspected U.S. airstrike in Iraq

unfortunately, most people are christians in name only. in reality, their actions are those of the antichrist.

 

[dfnj]

unfortunately, most people are christians in name only. in reality, their actions are those of the antichrist.

The war and killing just makes me so angry I can't help but grind my ax.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I believe it's because people hate him and what he stands for. Jesus stands for nonreligious, spiritual truth. Everybody has their traditions that they worship rather than God even if they don't know it. Bottom line: No one seeks God. Otherwise, why would they have killed him? They had no reason. The religious people accused him of blasphemy, which would have been true had Jesus not been God. But the resurrection proves the very fact Jesus was God.

This made no sense

 

[syo]

Jesus is not God. God is God. Why do you have two words for the same. You just idol worship the words "Jesus Christ" not what the words mean. What the word God means is what I worship.

i accept the nicene creed. jesus is the son.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I for one believe in Jesus. Not as he is presented in the Bible as some demi-god, but as a man of God. But I hold the same admiration for Muhammad, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, etcetera.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

i accept the nicene creed. jesus is the son.

That's all bad. You support the council that pick and chose things in the Bible and made things into law that shouldn't be and those who refused were either excommunicated or killed?

 

[syo]

That's all bad. You support the council that pick and chose things in the Bible and made things into law that shouldn't be and those who refused were either excommunicated or killed?

the council gave a certain form to christianity. i don't think it's bad. christianity should have a formal teaching i guess.

 

[Jainarayan]

never was the body of jesus found.

That's not proof either. Genghis Khan's body and tomb were never found, but his existence is well documented.

 

[syo]

That's not proof either. Genghis Khan's body and tomb were never found, but his existence is well documented.

i don't think the gospels are fictions. i think they are real, all of them, including the gospels that are not in the bible.

 

[Quintessence]

deny, i mean reject his teachings, deny he is god. deny his life and death and resurrection.

I think it would be a good idea to parse those items out into distinct questions. A person's answers to each of those can be different.

• On Teachings - neither deny nor accept (ignorant), or coincidentally deny/accept. I'm not Christian, so I haven't studied the teachings of Jesus to any significant degree. This means I couldn't tell you what those teachings are, much less accept or deny them. I'm in a position of ignorance. What knowledge I have of them is largely hearsay, and I'm not to keen to base much of an opinion on hearsay. Besides, no teacher owns their teachings - ideas are found in many places. If I hold to (or reject) ideas that happen to be associated with Jesus, it'd be coincidental.
• On Divinity - both accept and deny, but ultimately indifferent. My tradition follows the notion that all is worthy of worship (aka, divine), so on that level one could say I accept the divinity of Jesus. On another level, this is probably not the sort of accepting that Christians are looking for and I do not have any meaningful relationship (worshipful or otherwise) with this deity. Ultimately, the divinity or lack thereof of Jesus is irrelevant to me. He's not part of my religious traditions.
• On Life/Death/Resurrection - both accept and deny, but ultimately indifferent. All stories are interesting to me; I accept Christian mythology as much as I accept any other mythology. But as with the divinity of Jesus, this is probably not the sort of accepting that Christians want to see as there's no meaningful relationship between me and their mythology. As a non-Christian, I'm not particularly interested in Christian mythology one way or another. Again, not part of my religion.

There's an overarching theme here, isn't there?

I'm not Christian.

Really, the question boils down to the sort of silliness of "why aren't you interested in football?" Because I'm not. If other people can't deal with the fact that I have no interest in football, that's more their problem than mine.

 

[Jainarayan]

i don't think the gospels are fictions. i think they are real, all of them, including the gospels that are not in the bible.

Of course they're real and based in some fact... most legends, stories myths. The questions are, however, how truthful are they and how much are they embellished? If one believes them to be "gospel truth" (I just had to ), that's fine. I respect other people's beliefs inasmuch as they don't try to force them on me.

I just don't understand the need people have to prove it. Again, whom are they trying to convince, themselves or the rest of us? For me, my own scriptures are sufficient as they are because of the lessons they teach, the wisdom and universal truths they contain. I don't necessarily believe this is an actual historical event:

nor do I feel the need to prove it to myself or anyone else, but there are lessons to be learned from the story.

 

[dianaiad]

Perhaps you could define 'deny.'

Simply not believing that He existed...or that He is Who Christians claim He is...isn't 'denial,' I don't think.

The dictionary says that 'deny' means: state that one refuses to admit the truth or existence of.

Before one can deny something, then, one must understand what one is denying.

I'd say, personally, that the majority of humans really don't know or understand Who Jesus is...and if they don't, how can they deny Him?

 

[dfnj]

i accept the nicene creed. jesus is the son.

We are all sons and daughters of our creator. This is fandom and idol worship at its worse.

How is it every time I have a conversation about religion with a Christian it always feels like it has nothing to do with God.

 

[dfnj]

i don't think the gospels are fictions. i think they are real, all of them, including the gospels that are not in the bible.

This theory has some amazing coincidences as evidence:

 

[wizanda]

How is it every time I have a conversation about religion with a Christian it always feels like it has nothing to do with God.

Find this same thing with Muslims, Christians and Jews; it is either argue over what something is or how that thing affects you in someway...

Like higher forms of enlightenment discussion (Satsang); with questions like what is the Source of Reality, as we find the Buddha, Lao Tzu, Yeshua, and others discussing, these aren't even in question.

Really not sure how all these people think they will fit into an Age of Enlightenment; yet they're all religiously seeking.

This theory has some amazing coincidences as evidence:

There are numerous errors with Joseph Atwill's theory, yet one of the biggest for me is the idea it is a Roman fabricated religion at the time of the Flavians (69 AD to 96 AD)...

Well historically Constantine's Arch (315 AD) doesn't have Christian symbolism, and still has Roman deities; thus if Caesar's Messiah added up, Christianity would already be established in Rome at that time.

Can also show how Joseph Atwill doesn't distinguish the difference in the false texts of John, Paul and Simon the stone (petros); these can be shown blatantly filling in Roman values...

Compared to the teachings of Yeshua in the Synoptic Gospels; where we can show that historically fulfilled, we can all see the 2nd temple was destroyed, and the Jews have been persecuted for the last 2000 years for rejecting him.

In my opinion.

 

[Akivah]

it depends what people are taught at a young age.

Looks like you answered your own question.