Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
Name them. Plus, many “witnesses” weren’t present.People numbering in the thousands. That's quite a few eyewitnesses to call liars.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Name them. Plus, many “witnesses” weren’t present.People numbering in the thousands. That's quite a few eyewitnesses to call liars.
Running into a mountain is dangerous if you’re a coyote and perfectly safe if you’re a roadrunner.The difference is that walking of a cliff is demonstrably bad for you.
Nobody has to take that on "faith".
He can be a master and still suck at it.i have found different ones that have the thought that Jesus is a servant. then when Jesus does not give them what they want then he is not a good servant , unworthy and not real impotent if Jesus is not going to give/do what they want.
Jesus thought Peter should be able to.Unless someone thinks they're immune to gravity.
Not really because supposedly there is only one source for the information: God. Why can’t God keep the story straight?Of course! Different people are going to have different viewpoints, and therefore differing concerns. A physician (Luke) is going to see things differently than a former tax collector (Matthew), for example. That's actually an advantage to having 4 different Gospel accounts.
I believe it is because I find the Muslims saying they believe in Jesus but then they don't believe He is God in the flesh. They believe things about Jesus that they wish to believe and even refuse to believe the words of Jesus about Himself.Why do you believe the two are mutually exclusive?
Perhaps that would explain why memory can be restored because the spirit informs the mind.Don't ask me, but many denominations believe so. Eastern Ordthodox church for example says that when someone gets amnesia, the soul continues to have memory, while the brain cannot remember due to physical damage. I think that Catholics believe the same.
I believe He does but people don't.Not really because supposedly there is only one source for the information: God. Why can’t God keep the story straight?
Why can't the person remember through his soul/spirit then? And what happens when there is permanent amnesia? In other words you mean that the soul/spirit does not keep memories and can not work without the brain.. so it is useless as far as memory is concerned.Perhaps that would explain why memory can be restored because the spirit informs the mind.
well good for them .Jesus is not the god you are trying to make him to be . he is the son of God, subordinate ,a servant of GodI believe it is because I find the Muslims saying they believe in Jesus but then they don't believe He is God in the flesh. They believe things about Jesus that they wish to believe and even refuse to believe the words of Jesus about Himself.
The mind is not always fully aware of its spirit for the memories to return. Usually the spirit can step in and take control but not if the mind is blocking it.Why can't the person remember through his soul/spirit then? And what happens when there is permanent amnesia? In other words you mean that the soul/spirit does not keep memories and can not work without the brain.. so it is useless as far as memory is concerned.
Is soul/spirit useful in any other respect in a body?
I believe you have no basis for that and I have a heap of evidence that Jesus is God in the flesh. What do you think Son of God means in this context?well good for them .Jesus is not the god you are trying to make him to be . he is the son of God, subordinate ,a servant of God
I will reply to you with what I posted in another thread...The mind is not always fully aware of its spirit for the memories to return. Usually the spirit can step in and take control but not if the mind is blocking it.
Jesus is a person that God created, even as a man fathers as son by procreation.I believe you have no basis for that and I have a heap of evidence that Jesus is God in the flesh. What do you think Son of God means in this context?
The only "evidence" you have that Jesus is God in the flesh comes from your sacred texts and various ecumenical councils. IOW you have no evidence at all.I believe you have no basis for that and I have a heap of evidence that Jesus is God in the flesh. What do you think Son of God means in this context?
There is no evidence in the sacred texts and various ecumenical councils are not evidence. IOW he has no evidence at all.The only "evidence" you have that Jesus is God in the flesh comes from your sacred texts and various ecumenical councils. IOW you have no evidence at all.
I would say that the New Testament gives conflicting remarks, some indicating Jesus is divine, and others indicating he is just a man. People on both sides of the argument simply choose to accent some verses and ignore others.There is no evidence in the sacred texts and various ecumenical councils are not evidence. IOW he has no evidence at all.
I know of no verses that say that Jesus is God in the flesh. Of course, it is all in how people interpret verses, what they interpret them to mean.I would say that the New Testament gives conflicting remarks, some indicating Jesus is divine, and others indicating he is just a man. People on both sides of the argument simply choose to accent some verses and ignore others.
There's an easy way to end all of this ... there are a small handful of verses that say:I'm curious on why people don't believe in Jesus?