• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why Praise God When He's The One Who Brought Coronavirus To Us?

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
.................And how can you explain Jesus not allowing Mary to touch Him?
"Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”​
But then eight days latter He invites Thomas to touch His side:
"Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side.​
Was Jesus just objecting to Mary Magdalene touching him(?) because others took hold of resurrected Jesus' feet at Matthew 28:9,1.
Perhaps Mary thought Jesus would leave right away.
So, when Jesus told Mary to go to his disciples he was showing he was still going to be hanging around.- Matthew 28:10

A physical body does Not enter a closed room.
Resurrected Jesus appears twice in a shut room - John 20:17-19, and 8 days later at John 20:26-30
So, Jesus used different materialized bodies to appear.
The body of verse 26 was for doubting Thomas.
If resurrected Jesus would have used that same body that he used for Thomas, he would have Not been mistaken for a stranger.
- Luke 24:15-18
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
You have got to be kidding. He isn't posting whole chapters. He is quoting only parts of single verse and intentionally leaving the parts that establish the context out.
How could you possibly know his motive for 'sometimes' quoting only parts of single verse and leaving the other parts out?
What is going on here? Are you his conjoined twin or something? Why defend his absurdity?
As I see it, there is nothing to defend.
I try not to accuse people of having hidden agendas when I cannot possibly ever know what their agendas are or even if they have any. Heck, I do not always even know why I do what I do, so how could I know the motives of other people on a forum who I barely know?

I also try not to judge people because Jesus said in Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. I did not have to quote that verse in context because it is obvious to me what Jesus meant by that and if other people want the context then they can click on the link and go to View in Context.

No, we are not conjoined twins, I just see @ SeekingAllTruth as a sincere person who is searching for the truth. I think I am qualified to know that because I have been posting on forums like this day and night for eight years. I also have a Master's degree in Psychology so I think I have fairly good assessment skills.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I apologize for Fallen's extremely rude behavior since s/he won't.
Thanks, but it is not you who needs to apologize. However, it is usually the people who are not to blame who do the apologizing. ;)

Moreover, if Christians have to defend the Bible so much, what does that say about the Bible?
I have never had to defend any of the Writings of Baha'u'llah.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Conjoined twins. That takes the cake. That takes the entire bakery, come to think of it.
I find it rather ironic that I am a Baha'i and I am always posting Bible verses to Christians to get my points across. o_O

Matthew 7:1-3 Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

I wonder if some Christians even know the meaning of the verses above.
Maybe I know what Jesus meant because Baha'u'llah said something very similar and He was very clear about it.

26: O SON OF BEING! How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 10

66: O EMIGRANTS! The tongue I have designed for the mention of Me, defile it not with detraction. If the fire of self overcome you, remember your own faults and not the faults of My creatures, inasmuch as every one of you knoweth his own self better than he knoweth others. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 45
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
No, I believe the Bible was wholly written by plain old Jewish and Greek scribes without any guidance whatsoever from a Higher entity. But if we're to assume as the Christians do that it is God-breathed then the King James is reputed to be the very best most excellent translation because it was done 500 years ago when the English language was much cleaner and free from idioms, corruptions, vague definitions of newer words, etc. "Evil" meant exactly that: EVIL, not "discomfort" "calamity" "uncertainty" and other nonsensical words to blunt a characteristic about God that apologists don't like.

Perfect example:

"And he could do no mighty work there..." Mark 6:5

Later theologians didn't like the sound of Jesus being powerless. I mean what kind of nincompoop god lacks power, right? So they called on the later gospel writers to ramp up Jesus' power but keep the original context. So here's what the writers of Matthew came up with:

"And he did not do many miracles there..." Matthew 13:58

You like that? Instead of not being able to do miracles at all, now Jesus IS able to but chooses not to do many of them. Clever, huh?

This what I mean about interpretations getting skewed over the course of time to slant in whatever direction the church wants it to slant.
Yeah, except your “logic” is flawed. That’s not how biblical exegesis works. You’ve managed to garner a completely derailed understanding of how differences in multiple attestation works.
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Thanks, but it is not you who needs to apologize. However, it is usually the people who are not to blame who do the apologizing. ;)

Moreover, if Christians have to defend the Bible so much, what does that say about the Bible?
I have never had to defend any of the Writings of Baha'u'llah.
It's true. Defending the Bible has become a part-time job without pay for millions of Christians whose beloved holy book has taken so many potshots it leaks like a pasta strainer.
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Not so. The earth holds us, nourishes us, cradles us. It provides for us. Creation is a wondrous place, full of beauty. In the end, it depends on our point of view. If you want to look at creation as a hostile place and humanity as ugly, it will inevitably keep you from loving fully. That’s your prerogative, I suppose. Early humanity not only survived, but thrived. That’s the reality. The dream — or nightmare — is that that thriving is a mistake of some sort. I can’t be a fatalist.
I get your sentiment. It's a "glass half-empty or glass half-full" situation. It wouldn't be surprising that I am a realist and a pessimist. I see no hope for mankind with overpopulation and global warming ramping up to exponential speeds. In 80 short years the global population is expected to increase to 11 billion people. That is an unsustainable number. Life on this fragile ball will be a literal hell on earth with temperatures rising near 5 degrees during the summer. So for example we have temps in the 110 F range here in LA during July-Oct. That will rise to 115 F frequently here. Humans cannot live in regular temps like that for long periods of time without air conditioning. Anyway I'm pulling this thread off-topic.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Ah, dear Trailblazer, we've been here many times before. If God is omnipotent (and omniscient, and perfect, and ...) then nothing can, nothing ever did, nothing ever will happen contrary to what [he] perfectly foresaw before [he] made the universe. And since [he] made the universe like that, it is always and only the universe all of whose details [he] foresaw and intended.
God foresaw what would happen when He made the universe, but God did not intend for humans to do what they have done. The fly in the ointment for your argument is that God gave humans free will, and even though an omnipotent God could override human free will God chooses not to do so.
I'm talking about what any moral being would do. If God's a moral being then I stand by what I said ─ [he] should intervene rather than let bad things happen.
I consider that patently absurd. God is not responsible for man’s moral choices so why should God clean up the mess after humans? If man followed God’s teachings and laws there would be no immorality so there would be no “bad things” happening.

“God hath in that Book, and by His behest, decreed as lawful whatsoever He hath pleased to decree, and hath, through the power of His sovereign might, forbidden whatsoever He elected to forbid. To this testifieth the text of that Book. Will ye not bear witness? Men, however, have wittingly broken His law. Is such a behavior to be attributed to God, or to their proper selves? Be fair in your judgment. Every good thing is of God, and every evil thing is from yourselves. Will ye not comprehend? This same truth hath been revealed in all the Scriptures, if ye be of them that understand.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 149-150
There is no theological free will with an omni god. There is no physical free will in that humans can't make decisions independently of their evolved decision-making brain functions.
Sorry, as you know I do not buy that argument. If there was no free will then man would not be responsible for his moral choices and then man could not be held accountable in courts of law. You cannot make that work. The brain does not make choices, the rational soul makes the choices and the process works like this: Knowledge ---> Volition---> Action. Volition is the will and without a will nothing would ever transpire.
A God who can only help "through helping humans" is not an omni god. Which is it?
It does not matter what God can do, it only matters what God chooses to do. God never does anything He does not choose to do so it is a moot point if He can. God doesn’t help because God considered it man’s responsibility to help himself. That is why we have been given a brain and free will.
That's a humanist line, not a theological statement. It's a human problem and humans must fix it, and the vaccine projects haven't done a bad job.
That is how Baha’is think, like humanists. We don’t believe God who is responsible to do what we can do for ourselves.
Then if your God exists, I reject [him] outright as meaningless in my terms.
That is fine by God because God does not require our acceptance. God is accustomed to being rejected. If the only meaning God has for you is as a rescuer of humans that would be the wrong reason to believe.

For so many atheists God is omnipotent means “God should do whatever I expect Him to do.” What those atheists totally miss is that an omnipotent God does not have to do anything He does not want to do, and that is why He doesn’t live up to their expectations.

Another thing that some atheists miss is that they are not omnipotent so they cannot order an omnipotent God around.

Another thing that some atheists miss is that an omniscient God knows more than they do regarding how to run a universe.

These are not small things to miss for people who consider themselves logical. It is like missing the broad side of a barn. :eek:
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
No, I believe the Bible was wholly written by plain old Jewish and Greek scribes without any guidance whatsoever from a Higher entity. But if we're to assume as the Christians do that it is God-breathed then the King James is reputed to be the very best most excellent translation because it was done 500 years ago when the English language was much cleaner and free from idioms, corruptions, vague definitions of newer words, etc. "Evil" meant exactly that: EVIL, not "discomfort" "calamity" "uncertainty" and other nonsensical words to blunt a characteristic about God that apologists don't like.

Perfect example:

"And he could do no mighty work there..." Mark 6:5

Later theologians didn't like the sound of Jesus being powerless. I mean what kind of nincompoop god lacks power, right? So they called on the later gospel writers to ramp up Jesus' power but keep the original context. So here's what the writers of Matthew came up with:

"And he did not do many miracles there..." Matthew 13:58

You like that? Instead of not being able to do miracles at all, now Jesus IS able to but chooses not to do many of them. Clever, huh?

This what I mean about interpretations getting skewed over the course of time to slant in whatever direction the church wants it to slant.

Very Good.
 

Fallen Prophet

Well-Known Member
How could you possibly know his motive for 'sometimes' quoting only parts of single verse and leaving the other parts out?
I know his motive because I quoted to him these verses in their entirety - which provided the proper context - and he still ignored them.

He did this twice. The first was with the verse in Isaiah where he left out the first line of the verse then again in Mark when he left out the second half of the verse.

My goodness that verse in Mark clearly claimed that Jesus performed miracles - but he left that part out - then refused to accept it once I pointed it out to him.

It's not like he is starting to read the verse and gives up half way so he missed something - he left out the beginning of one verse and the end of another.

It's intentional omission to push his anti-Bible agenda.
As I see it, there is nothing to defend.
I try not to accuse people of having hidden agendas when I cannot possibly ever know what their agendas are or even if they have any. Heck, I do not always even know why I do what I do, so how could I know the motives of other people on a forum who I barely know?
If there is nothing to defend - then why defend him? Why get involved at all?
I also try not to judge people because Jesus said in Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. I did not have to quote that verse in context because it is obvious to me what Jesus meant by that and if other people want the context then they can click on the link and go to View in Context.
No - you need context.

Jesus was not telling anyone never to judge others in that verse - you need to read the next verse to understand that.

"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." (Matthew 7:2)

Meaning - use righteous judgment if you want to be judged righteously.

If you use unfair judgment - then you will be judged unfairly.

So - yeah - I want Jesus to call me out if I quote only parts of things in order to take them our of context. Because its dishonest.

I want Jesus to use the same judgment on me that I am using here.
No, we are not conjoined twins, I just see @ SeekingAllTruth as a sincere person who is searching for the truth. I think I am qualified to know that because I have been posting on forums like this day and night for eight years. I also have a Master's degree in Psychology so I think I have fairly good assessment skills.
Two appeals to authority?

It's too bad all that time and money did you no good.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
God foresaw what would happen when He made the universe, but God did not intend for humans to do what they have done.
No, that's ruled out by God's omnipotence. God could have made the universe any way [he] pleased, since [he] always had perfect knowledge of everything that would ever happen. [He] made it THIS way, with that knowledge, and that was [HIS] choice, [HIS] preference, [HIS] decision, [HIS] will.
The fly in the ointment for your argument is that God gave humans free will, and even though an omnipotent God could override human free will God chooses not to do so.
How can human will be free when God already perfectly knew everything you'd ever think say or do more than 14 billion years ago, and you're ABSOLUTELY powerless to deviate from that perfect foresight.
I consider that patently absurd. God is not responsible for man’s moral choices
Exactly the same again ─ you can ONLY make those moral choices God perfectly foresaw, so they're God's choices for you, not your own.

Or else God is not omni or perfect, of course, Which returns our discussion to physics and freewill.
so why should God clean up the mess after humans?
It's no one's mess but God's. There was never any power in humans to avoid it.
If man followed God’s teachings and laws there would be no immorality so there would be no “bad things” happening.
God made the universe with full knowledge knowing that would be impossible because of the way [he]'d made the universe.
Pity [he]'s not here or I could have put him straight. He sounds like a decent human, albeit given to prolixity. His followers here also seem to me consistently decent.
Sorry, as you know I do not buy that argument. If there was no free will then man would not be responsible for his moral choices and then man could not be held accountable in courts of law.
To be human is to have the strong feeling that you own your (unforced) choices, and we project that onto others and hold them responsible for their decisions and answer for our own. But didn't I previously refer you to SCOTUS' decision in Roper v Simmons that because the adolescent brain is still immature, the death penalty is inappropriate? And didn't I comment at that time that in future I'd expect to see brain physiology and function taken further into account regarding criminal liability?
You cannot make that work. The brain does not make choices
No brain, no choices. Soul is at very very best an unevidenced and unproven hypothesis. Its mechanisms for decision-making have been well studied and much learnt, particularly this century. I recommend Mariano Sigman's The Secret Life of the Mind as a clear and easy introduction.
For so many atheists God is omnipotent means “God should do whatever I expect Him to do.”
If God exists, yes, I expect [him] to act morally, and to be accountable for [his] endless moral failures. The world behaves exactly as though gods only exist as conceptual / imaginary things in individual human brains.

Always a pleasure!
 

Fallen Prophet

Well-Known Member
Thanks, but it is not you who needs to apologize. However, it is usually the people who are not to blame who do the apologizing. ;)

Moreover, if Christians have to defend the Bible so much, what does that say about the Bible?
I have never had to defend any of the Writings of Baha'u'llah.
No need to apologize when you didn't do anything wrong.

It's less "defending the Bible" and more "teaching ignorant people about the Bible".

You might not have to defend the Writings of Baha'u'llah because no one reads them or takes them seriously.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I know his motive because I quoted to him these verses in their entirety - which provided the proper context - and he still ignored them.

He did this twice. The first was with the verse in Isaiah where he left out the first line of the verse then again in Mark when he left out the second half of the verse.

My goodness that verse in Mark clearly claimed that Jesus performed miracles - but he left that part out - then refused to accept it once I pointed it out to him.

It's not like he is starting to read the verse and gives up half way so he missed something - he left out the beginning of one verse and the end of another.

It's intentional omission to push his anti-Bible agenda.
You do not know his agenda because you are not him. Only SeekingAllTruth (and the All-Knowing God) know his agenda so unless he tells us what his agenda is we cannot know what it is.

66: O EMIGRANTS! The tongue I have designed for the mention of Me, defile it not with detraction. If the fire of self overcome you, remember your own faults and not the faults of My creatures, inasmuch as every one of you knoweth his own self better than he knoweth others. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 45

Just because someone is against the Bible that does not mean they have an ‘anti-Bible agenda.’ You have not been in this forum long so I will fill you in. Many people on this forum are anti-Bible or anti-Christianity but that does not mean they have an ‘anti-Bible agenda.’ One does not follow from the other. In my opinion he is just trying to find people to talk to about the Bible and other things, and n as I said before I think he is a true seeker so he wants to know the truth about God and Jesus, whatever it is.

But even if @ SeekingAllTruth does have such an agenda it is his right to post whatever he wants to as long as he follows the forum rules. One of those rules is not to insult other people and he is posting well within that rule, but you are hovering in the edge with your off-handed remarks.

You have a right to revere the Bible but don’t expect other people to share your views. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. This is a religious forum and everyone has a right to their own opinions. If you do not like people talking about the Bible that way perhaps this is not the forum for you, or perhaps you need to post on threads where nobody is challenging the Bible.

Nobody needs to expose the Bible for what it is as everyone on this forum knows all about the Bible, both Christians and atheists, and especially those ex-Christians who were Christians for most of their lives.
If there is nothing to defend - then why defend him? Why get involved at all?
I defend @ SeekingAllTruth because I consider my friend and also because justice is very important to me. Justice is just as important as love and it was the primary teaching of Baha’u’llah.

2: O SON OF SPIRIT! The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 3-4

“Say: Observe equity in your judgment, ye men of understanding heart! He that is unjust in his judgment is destitute of the characteristics that distinguish man’s station.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 204

Justice means punishing actions or words that are wrong and upholding things that are good. This helps ensure that wrongs will be ended and rights will be upheld thereby leading to a safer society for everyone. It would seem sometimes that children have a keen internal sense of justice.
What is justice and why is it important? - Quora

It is an injustice to judge someone unfairly and that is why I stand up for people when I see that they are being judged unfairly. Jesus said to judge not lest ye be judged, not only because you will be judged in return. That is a selfish reason not to judge people. The most important reason not to judge is because it is unjust to judge others.
No - you need context.

Jesus was not telling anyone never to judge others in that verse - you need to read the next verse to understand that.

"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." (Matthew 7:2)
Meaning - use righteous judgment if you want to be judged righteously.

If you use unfair judgment - then you will be judged unfairly.

So - yeah - I want Jesus to call me out if I quote only parts of things in order to take them our of context. Because its dishonest.

I want Jesus to use the same judgment on me that I am using here.
That is your opinion that I need context but given the point I was trying to make I did not need the context. I did not need to go on about why Jesus said that because I was only pointing out that we should not judge other people.

I believe that Jesus was telling us not to judge other people and then he told us some of the consequences of judging other people: 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

It might be true that if we use righteous judgment we are more likely to be judged righteously and if we use unfair judgment then we are more likely to be judged unfairly, but Jesus did not give that as a reason not to judge so that is your addition to the text.

Matthew 7:1-2 King James Version (KJV)

7 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Matthew 7:3-5 King James Version (KJV)

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.


In my opinion, what Jesus said in Matthew 7:3-5 is more important than what He said in Matthew 7:1-2. Judging other people in the context of these verses is looking at their faults so what Jesus is saying is not to look at the faults of others but rather look at your own faults. Baha’u’llah said the same thing.

26: O SON OF BEING! How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 10

I feel very strongly about people finding fault with other people because my religion teaches not to find fault with others. The Baha'i Faith teaches that if a man has nine bad qualities and only one good quality we should only look at the one good quality and ignore the other nine qualities. It also teaches us not to offend other people.

“The most hateful characteristic of man is fault-finding. (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Star of the West, Vol. IV, No.11, p. 192)

“Beware lest ye offend the feelings of anyone, or sadden the heart of any person, or move the tongue in reproach of and finding fault with anybody, whether he is friend or stranger, believer or enemy . . . Beware, beware that any one rebuke or reproach a soul, though he may be an ill-wisher and an ill-doer.” (Abdu’l-Bahá, Tablets of Abdu’l-Bahá v1, p. 44)

“All religions teach that we should love one another; that we should seek out our own shortcomings before we presume to condemn the faults of others, that we must not consider ourselves superior to our neighbours! We must be careful not to exalt ourselves lest we be humiliated.” (Abdu’l-Bahá, Paris Talks, p. 147)

Two appeals to authority?

It's too bad all that time and money did you no good.
I was not appealing to any authority, I have no authority. I was only replying to your questions regarding conjoined twins and why I was defending SeekingAllTruth.

Making such snide comments about me is insulting other people. Insulting people only makes you look like a bad Christian. Moreover, Christians on this forum do not normally insult other people just because they disagree with them, and since people on this forum do not normally insult other people those who do that stick out like a sore thumb.

How do you know what good my education did for me? You do not know me. Who are you to judge me? Judging others is going against what Jesus taught, and maybe you do not even realize that. Jesus said “Judge not, that ye be not judged.” Jesus did not say it is okay to judge people under certain circumstances.

My education did me a lot of good, as it helped me see the patterns of human behavior and why people do what they do. It also helped me recognize when people are projecting their own thoughts and feelings onto other people which is a very common human behavior.

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.
Psychological projection - Wikipedia
 

Brian2

Veteran Member

Yes, ' taken from you.... ' ( Like an air plane taken in the clouds becomes invisible to those on the ground )
And since John 14:19 Jesus says........ the world would see him No more;.........
Then, as Jesus was invisible to the human eye surrounded by a cloud, then we will see with the ' mind's eye' .
A mental perception such as the things found at Luke 21:11; 2 Timothy 3:1-5,13

John 16:9 in regard to sin, because they do not believe in Me; 10 in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you will no longer see Me;

Does this mean that His disciples would never see Him again. If not, then why do you think that John 14:19 means that the world will never see Him again.
Surely all Jesus was saying was that He was going back to heaven soon and won't be around in bodily form to be seen.
You believe the disciples Jesus spoke to would see Him again so why not believe that the whole world will see Him when He returns, just as the scriptures tell us.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
No need to apologize when you didn't do anything wrong. .
I consider criticizing and insulting other people wrong, according to the Bible as well as the Baha’i teachings.
It's less "defending the Bible" and more "teaching ignorant people about the Bible"..
So do you think you are teaching ignorant people about the Bible? Don’t you think that people can read the Bible for themselves and come to their own conclusions about what it means?
You might not have to defend the Writings of Baha'u'llah because no one reads them or takes them seriously.
How would you know what people take seriously? Sure, Writings of Baha'u'llah are not as well-known as the Bible, as the Baha’i Faith has only been around for a little over 150 years. How many people do you think took Christianity seriously in the first centuries?

“Just how small was the Christian movement in the first century is clear from the calculations of the sociologist R Stark (1996:5-7; so too Hopkins 1998:192-193).Stark begins his analysis with a rough estimation of six million Christians in the Roman Empire (or about ten percent of the total population) at the start of the fourth century... There were 1,000 Christians in the year 40, 1,400 Christians in 50, 1,960 Christians in 60, 2,744 Christians in 70, 3,842 Christians in 80, 5,378 Christians in 90 and 7,530 Christians at the end of the first century.

These figures are very suggestive, and reinforce the point that in its initial decades the Christian movement represented a tiny fraction of the ancient world.”


How many Jews became Christians in the first century?

Surely more people read the Bible than the Baha’i Writings but the Bible because the Bible has been around for 2000 years. However, the Bible is taken less and less seriously every day, and eventually the Bible will be a relic of the past, since the Christian dispensation has been unconditionally abrogated by the Revelation of Baha’u’llah. You do not have to agree with that but that is what I believe and I have a right to share it on a religious forum.

I often do have to defend my Baha’i beliefs and Baha’u’llah because many people attack them voraciously; they are just not doing that presently on this forum because they are taking a break. ;)
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
This is an analysis of an Old Testament version of Yahweh applied in the modern world. Forget Yahweh's "I change not." God changes regularly according to how men of faith choose to describe Him in their writings. He's a brutal murderer in Joshua, a more benevolent god in the prophets era and a loving father in Jesus time. Today he is just absent.

God loves us all but is also our judge, jury and executioner, now and back in OT times.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
None of this is in the Bible. This is all your personal interpretation of some extremely vague passages. I think it's baloney that I am guilty for something a couple of mythical characters did 6000 years ago. This was an invention by the church to get pagans to believe that they were born in sin and needed Jesus to get them out. Again, this is a very subjective interpretation. 20 other people in here can each interpret the passage entirely differently. I only go by the language and the language has God clearly saying,

"I create evil"

Don't read more into it.

If you mean "evil" as in moral evil, then that is your error.
 
Top