What do you think the Good News of Jesus Christ is?

[Saint Frankenstein]

You know, I bet that if you and I were to sit down and discuss the similarities between Mormonism and Catholicism, you would be astounded about how much we actually agree on.

I think there's more similarities between Catholics and Mormons than there are between Catholics and Jehovah's Witnesses.

 

[Katzpur]

What do I think the Good News of Jesus Christ is? To me, it's that we are all (nobody is excluded here) sons and daughters of a Father in Heaven who knows us individually and loves us more than we can even begin to comprehend. It is the understanding that He designed a plan by which we can experience mortality, develop the ability to know right from wrong, learn from the example of His Only Begotten Son, accept His Son as our Savior and Redeemer, know that He voluntarily suffered to pay the price for our sins, and be able to look forward with faith in Eternal Life with God and with our loved ones.

 

[Katzpur]

I think there's more similarities between Catholics and Mormons than there are between Catholics and Jehovah's Witnesses.

Actually, there are far more similarities between Mormons and Catholics than there are between Mormons and most Protestants. I used to think Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses have more in common than I now believe to be the case.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Far as I'm concerned, the more ways something can be interpreted and applied, the better. In fact, the Adam and Eve story is one of the deepest condensed stories out there, because of how many ways it can be seen.

This serves no purpose to me. This is why I love a good research paper over a book of a philosophical text that does not apply epistemic reasoning

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Actually, there are far more similarities between Mormons and Catholics than there are between Mormons and most Protestants. I used to think Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses have more in common than I now believe to be the case.

That's really cool. Should start a thread on it.

 

[Sha'irullah]

What I am still surprised about is the message of Jesus in accordance to denominations. Why is it the message of Jesus has changed so much. Was his message not clear enough to prevent the Catholics from purging the Nordic tribes and slaughtering them in order to convert them.
Much like a poorly written academic essay I cannot determine the message of Jesus.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What I am still surprised about is the message of Jesus in accordance to denominations. Why is it the message of Jesus has changed so much. Was his message not clear enough to prevent the Catholics from purging the Nordic tribes and slaughtering them in order to convert them.

That's a different topic and a complicated subject that has a lot to do with political issues.

Much like a poorly written academic essay I cannot determine the message of Jesus.

Love of God and neighbor, forgiveness, mercy, compassion, self-sacrifice and service to others.

 

[Riverwolf]

This serves no purpose to me. This is why I love a good research paper over a book of a philosophical text that does not apply epistemic reasoning

The purpose is yours, not necessarily someone else's.

For me, research papers are generally dull, and don't really capture what I find the most important parts. They have their value, sure, but I don't regard them as the final word on anything except dry facts.

 

[Riverwolf]

What I am still surprised about is the message of Jesus in accordance to denominations. Why is it the message of Jesus has changed so much. Was his message not clear enough to prevent the Catholics from purging the Nordic tribes and slaughtering them in order to convert them.
Much like a poorly written academic essay I cannot determine the message of Jesus.

Christianity's spread through Northern Europe (that is, Europe North of the Mediterranean) was generally peaceful, and largely politically inspired. King Olaf the Lawbreaker was an exception; hence the title he's given nowadays.

Frankly, I think acts like the felling of Thor's Oak, and equating Baldur with Jesus, would have done more to convert the Nords to Christianity than any amount of slaughter the Lawbreaker did.

Not that any of that matters much. No message is incapable of being corrupted.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Christianity's spread through Northern Europe (that is, Europe North of the Mediterranean) was generally peaceful, and largely politically inspired. King Olaf the Lawbreaker was an exception; hence the title he's given nowadays.

Frankly, I think acts like the felling of Thor's Oak, and equating Baldur with Jesus, would have done more to convert the Nords to Christianity than any amount of slaughter the Lawbreaker did.

Not that any of that matters much. No message is incapable of being corrupted.

Good post.

 

[jah59]

It teaches apologetics, that promote pseudo history.

Again you're entitled to your own opinion, but can you be more specific?

Jesus said no such thing, the unknown author made that claim, writing far removed from Jesus actual life.

Not one word in the NT was from someone who witnessed or heard a word Jesus said.

Your just proselytizing.

Looks like baseless opinion to me. Do you realize that the historical record of manuscript evidence backing up the New Testament makes the very existence of Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great questionable by comparison?

You seem to be the one doing the proselytizing, while I'm merely providing a convenience to those who are interested. You're the one who brought up something that is just a footer in my original post!

 

[outhouse]

Looks like baseless opinion to me. Do you realize that the historical record of manuscript evidence backing up the New Testament makes the very existence of Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great questionable by comparison?

You seem to be the one doing the proselytizing, while I'm merely providing a convenience to those who are interested. You're the one who brought up something that is just a footer in my original post!

It is not baseless, it is the current state of historicity, something you do not seem to know or understand at all.

Apologetics is fine, and if you want to proselytize, please do it in the same faith section. Out here your fair game.

I also offered you a credible method of research, Yale not good enough for you?

 

[fantome profane]

Do you realize that the historical record of manuscript evidence backing up the New Testament makes the very existence of Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great questionable by comparison?

Nonsense.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Christianity's spread through Northern Europe (that is, Europe North of the Mediterranean) was generally peaceful, and largely politically inspired. King Olaf the Lawbreaker was an exception; hence the title he's given nowadays.

Frankly, I think acts like the felling of Thor's Oak, and equating Baldur with Jesus, would have done more to convert the Nords to Christianity than any amount of slaughter the Lawbreaker did.

Not that any of that matters much. No message is incapable of being corrupted.

I do not believe this in the slightest bit, every time there is an act of violence there is an excuse. Killing specifically with the intent to convert is an act of genocide in the name of religion. You do not see Communist doing this or sousing atheistic ideology, primarily because no ideology is the basis of atheism.
On the other hand you have proselytizing as the basis for the acts of Christians and Muslims.
Also Christianity was not spread through Northern Europe peacefully for the most part after gradual cessation of the Roman Empire

 

[jah59]

Nonsense.

Available in many places on the web, but here's one:
How Do Other Ancient Texts Compare to the New Testament? #10 Post of 2012 | Tough Questions Answered

 

[Riverwolf]

I do not believe this in the slightest bit, every time there is an act of violence there is an excuse. Killing specifically with the intent to convert is an act of genocide in the name of religion. You do not see Communist doing this or sousing atheistic ideology, primarily because no ideology is the basis of atheism.
On the other hand you have proselytizing as the basis for the acts of Christians and Muslims.
Also Christianity was not spread through Northern Europe peacefully for the most part after gradual cessation of the Roman Empire

I was not excusing the Lawbreaker's actions. I curse his name as much as any one. But from what I've seen of Northern Europe's history, the bulk of successful conversions of various states to Christianity was done peacefully. I'm most prominently of Irish descent. While I don't celebrate St. Patrick on the day that bears his name because he basically destroyed the last semi-intact Celtic culture not tainted by Rome, I don't curse his name because he did so relatively peacefully. Heck, the Irish were more keen on killing him than he was on killing them.

Even the so-called "Burning Times", the common Pagan conception of which I regard as more myth than history, didn't really happen until the Protestant Reformation and Spanish Inquisition. That was NOT a time to be living in Europe. Even still, witch-burnings were generally limited to the areas that correspond to modern day Germany and Eastern France. England, for example, has on record only 4 witch-burnings from this time period.

And if you think Communism didn't spread by the sword, brush up on your history of Stalin's Russia. Sure, it wasn't to espouse atheism specifically, but that doesn't matter.

Beyond that, I'm a bit confused. Do you actually believe a message or social system can be formulated that's free of any potential for corruption?

 

[fantome profane]

Available in many places on the web, but here's one:
How Do Other Ancient Texts Compare to the New Testament? #10 Post of 2012 | Tough Questions Answered

Christian Apologetics Blog

 

[Sha'irullah]

I was not excusing the Lawbreaker's actions. I curse his name as much as any one. But from what I've seen of Northern Europe's history, the bulk of successful conversions of various states to Christianity was done peacefully. I'm most prominently of Irish descent. While I don't celebrate St. Patrick on the day that bears his name because he basically destroyed the last semi-intact Celtic culture not tainted by Rome, I don't curse his name because he did so relatively peacefully. Heck, the Irish were more keen on killing him than he was on killing them.

And if you think Communism didn't spread by the sword, brush up on your history of Stalin's Russia. Sure, it wasn't to espouse atheism specifically, but that doesn't matter.

Beyond that, I'm a bit confused. Do you actually believe a message or social system can be formulated that's free of any potential for corruption?

I never said once that Communism was not spread by the sword. I specifically stated that it was. That was the point of me saying that

 

[Riverwolf]

I never said once that Communism was not spread by the sword. I specifically stated that it was. That was the point of me saying that

There's a few edits to my post. Now, if you could clarify what you mean, then, if the now-completed post still fits this response.

 

[jah59]

I never said I am not responsible for my own actions. I am merely referring to how theism in general and specifically Christianity ruins any meaning to life. As a Christian I had no reason to even be on this earth, I would die and go to heaven. Anything I did was solely for my own benefit, so that I could go to heaven.

I'm sorry you received such a warped understanding of Christianity. Although it is true that fear is the beginning of knowledge, it is far from what it means to be a true Christian. Following Christ means seeking to share the love shown to you because he first loved us. Once you accept this, you're not seeking to do the right thing for your own benefit, but because you love God and love others. You actually reach the ultimate in purpose, because everything you do is for the benefit of others!