Jesus Failed Right?

[Muffled]

No it doesn't .. Test score = Zero .. a God that created everything .. by definition has to be everything .. or at least connected to everything in some way .. .. never mind being precluded from being part of everything .. or the sum total of everything .. IS .. God ..

So believe that God created everything if you wish ... is not what the Bible says .. but never the less .. you can believe what ever you like about God.but what is True is that God creating everything does not preclude God from being part of Everything and/or Everything .. this s a falsehood on your part ... and we should not base our beliefs on falsehood .. but on the True word and rock of the annointed one of God. ..

I believe you may state that it does not preclude God being part of everything but it isn't logical. The fact is that if God were everything then no creation would be necessary since everything would already exist. The Bible does say that God created everything so that was necessitated by the fact that everything did not already exist as God.

 

[Muffled]

Jesus Failed Right?

No, Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah was one of the most successful messengers/prophets of One G-d, please, right?

Regards

I believe He is God in the flesh so He speaks directly and does not need a messenger.

 

[paarsurrey]

Jesus Failed Right?

No, Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah was one of the most successful messengers/prophets of One G-d.
After the event of Crucifixion when he travelled to the East from Galilee and visited the 10 lost tribes of Israelite they accepted him in large numbers.

Regards

 

[Trailblazer]

No, that is fallacious reasoning. Is the fact that we discuss Muhammad more than 1400 years later evidence of his eternal success? Is the fact that Krishna is discussed more than 5100 years later evidence he was an eternal success?

Maybe it is not evidence of their eternal success, but it is evidence of their success.
Nobody knows what will be an eternal success since nobody can see into the future.

 

[Sargonski]

I believe you may state that it does not preclude God being part of everything but it isn't logical. The fact is that if God were everything then no creation would be necessary since everything would already exist. The Bible does say that God created everything so that was necessitated by the fact that everything did not already exist as God.

I did not state that . What is illogical and frankly worthless is the response when asked to define God in context of some action "God did it" "Everything" .. as the term Everything is an undefined quanity .. so the response is saying nothing in context as the definition of "a God" that we are looking for will describe the minimum power requirement to be classified as a God not "All Powerful " ..which is another ridiculous undefined quantity leading to the grand conclusion that everything is pre-ordained and "Life is but a dream" existentialist Fallacy.

God can be part of everything .. but this does not define - in context - the Godly powers held by this God who is part of everything .. but this also a nonsense definition for other reasons. call it the "God is everywhere" fallacy .. which states that it is perfectly possible for God to be everywhere .. but this does not define the activity of the God in your life sans the claim "Everything" .. everything in our life is preordained by this God of Everything .. as opposed to a God who sets up an experiment and watches what happens.

and yes .. If God is Everything .. and something has always existed then God has always existed .. but once again a circular existential buffonery in relation to the practical application of God = God interaction with the universe .. as if God does not interact in the universe we are just in a random state of nature without a God..

Understand ? so the definition for God "Everything" ends up being "nothing" .. "God does not exist" heh heh .

You can define a Rock as a God if you wish .. an uninteractive blob of matter .. but, that is the God of Everything" definition.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Maybe it is not evidence of their eternal success, but it is evidence of their success.
Nobody knows what will be an eternal success since nobody can see into the future.

You're right, my friend.
I should have said "enduring success".

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

No, that is fallacious reasoning. Is the fact that we discuss Muhammad more than 1400 years later evidence of his eternal success? Is the fact that Krishna is discussed more than 5100 years later evidence he was an eternal success?

Perhaps I should have written "enduring success".
As per your questions, yes, the fact that we keep discussing the teachings of Muhammad, Budha or Krishna after so many years is evidence of their enduring success.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Jesus spent 3 years trying to convert people right. Only ended up with twelve disciples. One of whom denied him, Matt. 26:69-75. One who betrayed him, Matt. 26:15.

Yeah, but actually, given human nature, that wasn't bad. The answer to the question in the subject heading: Jesus failed, right? is no. He didn't fail.

While on the cross he was derided and mocked. Matthew 27:39–44.

Well, no, I don't believe he died on a cross, it was a Hebrew torture stake. Xylon.

Jesus said he came for the Jews, Matthew 15:24. Who he was rejected by.

Yes. Jesus was a Jew, as were all writers of the Bible. Hebrew/Aramaic and Christian Greek scripture.

It was Paul who went to the gentiles and started the Christian movement.

Well, they all did. Jesus and his disciples. And Paul.

All of the miracles he did, healing people, bringing people back from the dead, feeding thousands with 5 loafs of bread and 2 fish. You'd think he'd have gotten more of a following among the people he claimed he came for.

We're here talking about it today. Many people embraced Christianity. Four hundred years later, with Constantine, the church pretty much had become apostate, but the truth of his teachings are easily found. You just have to separate the teachings from the apostacy.

Christians have promoted the idea that we should be more like Jesus? He was not a very good teacher/preacher to his chosen audience. Was it part of God's plan for Jesus to fail?

No, it wasn't a part of God's plan, nor did he fail. What do you think his objective was?

 

[paarsurrey]

Jesus Failed Right?

Well, they all did. Jesus and his disciples. And Paul.

While (Jesus)Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah never failed and was one of the most successful persons/prophets/messengers of G-d, I agree.

One must say however that Paul was never a disciple/apostle of Yeshua , Quran does not mention of Saul aka Paul; and Yeshua was a messenger sent by G-d to the Israelites only not to the pagans/Hellenist/Greeks/Romans, please, right?:
3:50
“And will make him a Messenger to the children of Israel

Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search

In Arabic, Chinese, English, French, German, Italian, Spanish and Urdu.

www.alislam.org

Right?

Regards
_______________________
3:50
وَرَسُوۡلًا اِلٰی بَنِیۡۤ اِسۡرَآءِیۡلَ ۬ۙ ﴿ۚ۵۰

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Quran does not mention of Saul aka Paul;

The Quran is irrelevant to Christianity, just as the New Testament is irrelevant to Judaism.

 

[Muffled]

The Quran is irrelevant to Christianity, just as the New Testament is irrelevant to Judaism.

I tend to believe their is relevance at a detailed level. Granted there are most likely adherents who don't believe there is a relevance.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I tend to believe their is relevance at a detailed level. Granted there are most likely adherents who don't believe there is a relevance.

Really? You as a Christian find the Quran relevant? So when it says that Jesus is not a God, you accept that? When it says Jesus didn't die, you accept that? When it says Muhammad is a prophet, you accept that? When it says the Bible is corrupted, you accept that? When it says that Christians such as yourself are to be second class citizens, you accept that? Because I find it impossible to believe that any Christian such as yourself would allow the Quran to dictate these kinds of teachings.

Perhaps you when you say "relevance" you mean something different than me? To me, saying the Quran is relevant to Christianity means that the Quran dictates Christian teachings. So, what is it that you mean?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Maybe it is not evidence of their eternal success, but it is evidence of their success.
Nobody knows what will be an eternal success since nobody can see into the future.

First of all, a person would have to be alive for there to be 'evidence of eternal success' aka everlasting life
God promises us a future according to Jeremiah 29:11-13
We have the expected end of wickedness coming in the soon coming future as seen at Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-15
For us chapter 35 of Isaiah paints a beautiful paradisical word picture of the future
Jesus saw 'eternal success' in seeing humble meek people inheriting the Earth as promised at Matt. 5:5 from Psalms 37:9-11; 22:26

 

[Trailblazer]

For us chapter 35 of Isaiah paints a beautiful paradisical word picture of the future

As I have said before, Isaiah 35 is not about a coming beautiful paradisaical world. It is about what we will see after the return of Christ.

Isaiah prophesied that the Plain of Sharon and the holy mountain, Carmel, would both be centers for the light and presence of the ‘Glory of the Lord’ in the last days. It can be seen that all these prophecies were fulfilled after Christ returned with a new name which was Baha'u'llah.

Isaiah 35 King James Version (KJV)

35 The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose. 2 It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the Lord, and the excellency of our God.

Above Haifa, Israel, stands Mt. Carmel and the blossoming desert, proclaiming the Glory of the Lord has come.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

As I have said before, Isaiah 35 is not about a coming beautiful paradisaical world. It is about what we will see after the return of Christ.
Isaiah prophesied that the Plain of Sharon and the holy mountain, Carmel, would both be centers for the light and presence of the ‘Glory of the Lord’ in the last days. It can be seen that all these prophecies were fulfilled after Christ returned with a new name which was Baha'u'llah.
Isaiah 35 King James Version (KJV)
35 The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose. 2 It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the Lord, and the excellency of our God.................................................................

Yes, what we will see ' after ' the return of Christ - Isaiah 35:5-6
Besides Earth becoming like paradisical Eden mankind will be healthy
Jesus comes to bring ' healing ' to earth's nations - Rev. 22:2

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, what we will see ' after ' the return of Christ - Isaiah 35:5-6
Besides Earth becoming like paradisical Eden mankind will be healthy
Jesus comes to bring ' healing ' to earth's nations - Rev. 22:2

Like I just said, I am not going to argue about this.
We disagree so let's leave it at that.
Otherwise what you are posting can be considered proselytizing, which is against the forum rules.