undone

Process, In your opinion, what didn't Jesus do to prove He is the Messiah?

Aren't biblical moral absolutes the same as the Ten Commandments? I think so but if I'm missing something please feel free to let me know. If they are as I believe them to be, then isn't the purpose of the Ten Commandments to show us our need for God's mercy? And isn't His mercy demonstrated by the offering of unconditional love and acceptance through Jesus Christ? And this is because Jesus bore the punishment for our sins on the cross? I believe this is correct. So, the purpose of moral absolutes isn't so much to cut our hand off when caught in the cookie jar, but to get us to realize we need to repent and recieve forgiveness. Now, how does that relate to Secondeve's "stealing to feed the kids" type scenario? The first sin is that our society didn't help the family in need (assuming they asked for help and/or were visible to the public). The second could be that the stealing parent didn't get off his rump and get a job and relies on theft as a means to get by. The third could be that the grocer didn't show mercy when and if they realized the family's dire need. I think we could go further with this but the problem is the fallen world we live in. In the Garden of Eden, there was no need to steal food, it was all around them. There was no need to murder, there was nothing to gain by it. There was no one to hate and no reason to hate them. There was only one true God to worship...until they wanted to be like God themselves. Again, we could go on and on. The point is, in a perfect world, moral absolutes are the natural state of things. No one is hungry or deprived of any need. And the bibles message is that God's plan is to restore earth back to it's Eden like status. It will be done in His timing and He does not want anyone to perish. Thus the FREE gift of mercy and grace through Jesus Christ our Lord. Moral absolutes (or the Ten Commandments) are meant to be a like a mirror that reflects back to us a true and sobering picture of what we are compared to the standards of God. Does this make sense?

I think it relates to the "god of the gaps" idea unbelievers accuse Christians of practicing. Of course, Jesus is the God according to Christians. The crutch is the supposed illusionary support of our claims that lacks evidence.

I love Zola's ministry. Do you get The Levitt Letter? The satire cartoons of Islam are worth it alone (not that it costs anything...its free). Zola went to be with the Lord but the ministry continues. Messianic Jews fascinate me. I'm not sure why other than they are the chosen people to bring God's message to the world. To hear it from them gives it a golden quality I can't put my finger on. It's almost a matter of fact kind of thing as though anyone should be able to get it. Zola's website also has a message board. I noticed it too has many of the same discussions as we have here on Worthy. I too have left TBN. Hal Lindsey and Zola were two of the biggest reasons I watched. I still catch Zola on ABC Family Sundays at midnight cst (or would that be Monday)

"Suppose we think of salvation in a much more concrete and empirically observable way as an actual change in men and women from natural self-centredness to, in theistic terms, God-centredness, or in more general terms, a new orientation centred in the Ultimate, the Real, as conceived and experienced within one's own tradition. Salvation in this sense is the central concern of each of the great world religions. Within Christianity it is conceptualized and experienced as the state in which Paul could say, 'It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me' (Gal. 2:20, RSV). Within Judaism it is conceived and experienced as the joy and responsibility of life lived in accordance with God's Torah. Within Islam it is conceived and experienced as a personal self-surrender to God in a life lived according to God's revealed commands. With Advaitic Hinduism it is conceived and experienced as a transcending of the ego and discovery of unity with the eternal reality of Brahman. Within Buddhism it is conceived and experienced as a loss of the ego point of view in a discovery of the Buddha nature of the universal interdependent process of which we are all part. And in each case this transformation of human existence from self-centredness to Reality-centredness is reached by a moral and spiritual path. So if we understand by salvation the transition to a life centred in the Divine, the Ultimate, the Real, we can properly look about us for the signs of it. To what extent is this transformation actually taking place among Christians, among Jews, among Muslims, among Hindus, among Buddhists? I suggest that, so far as we can tell, it is taking place to much the same extent within each of these traditions. It is true that we have no organized evidence or statistics to establish this. But we can properly put the issue the other way round. If anyone asserts that Christians in general are morally and spiritually better human beings than Jews, Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists in general, the onus is on them to produce the evidence for this. It cannot simply be affirmed a priori, without regard to the concrete realities of human life." John Hick (2001) 'The Theological Challenge of Religious Pluralism' in John Hick & Brian Hebblethwaite (eds) Christianity and Other Religions: Selected Readings (Oxford: Oneworld Publications) I can't speak for or against the validity of an other faith experience. I can only testify to my own experience and to the compelling evidence I believe to be found in Christianity. I can tell you that I was once a hopeless alcoholic. In despair over my inability to control my insatiable desire. Technically, I was "saved" as I had been through the motions. One day I decided to attend a Billy Graham Crusade just to say I'd been. His crusades start with worship music provided by the choir and two popular Christians artists. That night was The Gaithers and Micheal W. Smith. I was sitting in my seat listening to the music and enjoying it. Smith, the final performer before the speakers, was about half way through his set. All of the sudden, I felt a presence of something that touched my heart. It's hard to explain but it came over me like a wave of peace and joy. I felt as though I were witnessing a glimpse of what heaven was going to be like. A sea of people praising and worshipping our Lord. I began to break out into uncontrollable tears (mind you, no preaching from Mr. Graham had even started). I began to feel a sense of regret for the time that had passed in my life where I had squandered the opportunity to serve Him. To teach my children about Him. But I was assured that everything was okay and that today was a new day. This presence was so thick, I felt I could swirl my hand in it like a pool of water. I had never experienced anything like this in my life. I was not expecting anything going in. I continued to weep throughout the rest of the service. My wife asked me if I needed to go down to the stadium floor for the altar call Mr. Graham gives at the end of each service. I told her no, after all, I was already saved. We left the stadium and all the way home I continued to weep. I couldn't explain why. This presence stayed with me for two days. For two days I wept. I wasn't weeping out of regret, but more a weeping of joy. A joy that God did not abandon me despite my alcoholism and other misgivings in my past. At the end of the two days, my desire for alcohol was gone. I don't even think about it anymore. You have to understand the strength of my addiction to appreciate what it meant to be free. Truly free! Now someone may try to psycho-analyze what happened to me and give me a naturalistic explanation, but I know what I know. I can only share it with others. I believe I should share it with others. He touched me in a deep and profound way that will stay with me for the rest of my life. I had other "spiritual" experiences before then and have since as well. But nothing compares to the day I was set free from the bondage of alcoholism. Process, I don't know what other "religions" claim. I'm not sure I care other than I believe that Jesus Christ is The Way, The Truth, and The Life and I would like everyone, no matter their faith or background, to know the true God. I only ask that you trust that I am speaking from my heart. I have little to gain from sharing this with you. I hope that you respect my feelings and not try to take shots at what happened to me. If you were to, at that point, I truly feel I wil have "cast my pearls."

I heard that the Little Drummer Boy was in on the conspiracy with Santa. After all, the Little Drummer Boy is non-biblical too but he wants his equal time. I heard that if you play 'parumpa pum pum" backwards it says in a whispering voice "Santa is good..Santa is good". IT'S TIME FOR A NEW INQUISITION TO RID THE WORLD OF ALL THESE DECIEVERS! Seriously! There are definately bigger fish to fry out there.

Thanks CJ... I need all the prayer I can get. I hope you can get some sleep.

I liked it best when McDonald's used worms in their burgers.

He did, 2000 years ago. Some people still didn't believe. We're left with the personal testimony of those who witnessed His presence with us - The Gospels.

So we have another Christian wanting to use the "probability of prophecy fulfillment" argument. I'm not 'wanting' to, I am. Fullfilled prophecy isn't the only thing that I believe validates Christianity. I'd say the most powerful evidence for me personally is my own testimony of a changed life. But you did not know me before becoming saved and unless someone asks, I will refrain from writing the full story here. The prophecy stuff is just gravy. I was a Christian long before I came to know much about prophecy. The validation doesn't stop with prophecy or my testimony either. There's historical and archeological evidence to support the bible. There's the testimony of millions of people throughout the past 2000 years. There's the inference of design throughout creation. There's the NT accounts of wonders and signs (I know your argument but that doesn't mean they're not true acts of the Messiah either). There's the eyewitness testimony of the early saints and the fact that many of them were martyred for their faith. There's the continued fullfillment of prophecy even in the modern era. There's the life and ministry of Jesus. There's answered prayer. I'm sure I could think of some more. I realize, individually, you may be able to point out some "apparent" weaknesses. Yet this isn't much different than the evolutionist who holds on to what they believe despite some puzzle peices that are still missing with evolution. I here it all the time from evolutionists that feel when you combine all the peices science has together, it makes a compelling case. I will admit TP, as many times as I've seen topics like this on message boards, some of your arguments are original. Yet you can't verify your claims with 100% confidence of their accuracy either. I doubt any of us Christians who participate on Worthy are pinning the validity of their beliefs and faith on much of anything outside their personal transformations by the Holy Spirit after placing their trust in Jesus Christ our Lord. Again, the rest is gravy.

With regard to Isaiah 53, I believe that there are good reasons to think that it isn't talking about Jesus. I did ask you whether you could respond to the common objections that are given. One quick thing I might add for consideration. When the OT refers to Israel or the church, it usually uses a female reference such as she or her. Isaiah 53 references a male. TP, Finals are coming up so many of my posts will be brief if present at all over the next 2 weeks.

You mean you didn't personally invent the interpretation? I think we know that. You didn't answer the question.

So you have no clue what the Old Testament says with regards to the coming Messiah. Do you have much of a clue about it? Are we going to get an argument out of you that Biblical criteria support Jesus as the Messiah? Are you able to provide some substantial argument on this point? I am thinking you are probably just wasting time. Yes I do. Fullfilled OT prophecy. Remarkable fullfillment in detail and incredible mathematical probability. Am I? Anyone can sit back at take pot-shots at someone's statements. The explanations of this particular topic fill books. To simply summarize them in a few paragraphs, leaves them open to be easily misunderstood. You've seen many examples posted on this thread. Most do not stray from common orthodoxy. Your conspiracy theories are amusing at best.

Is it mearly the fig tree comparison you have a problem with? BTW - This is not my own interpretation. I've heard it taught on other occasions (Not just the fig tree example).

So you have no clue what the Old Testament says with regards to the coming Messiah.

I can tell you what Judaism thinks on this issue. Obviously you wouldn't agree with that. If you think that you know Biblical criteria that show Jesus to be the Messiah then please explain it to us, rather than wasting time questioning me about it. I'd prefer understanding where you are coming from in order to present my responses accordingly. If it is solely based on what this particular sect of Jews is saying, so be it. Don't be afraid to let us know. Ultimately, I prefer avoiding answers from you such as "I don't think so" when clearly, if you look at the text based on it's face value, you could certainly extract a meaning and a context from it that is CLEARLY plausible. You shouldn't be afraid to admit that even if it doesn't help your argument. It helps you build credibility. Otherwise, I am left to assume I am debating with someone totally unreasonable. I don't think there is anything wrong with withdrawing from debate with an unreasonable opponent. You can call me what you like, it doesn't matter. However if you want to continue in a debate with me, you have to tell me what you believe to be true regarding the Messiah and why. Also, you asked that we agree to sticking to a literal translation of scripture and up front, I agreed that this is best. However, there is clearly symbolism and figurative speech used in the old and new testament. A literal translation would not benefit anyone in these cases. There are obviously varying translations of this symbolism from person to person. I rely on fundamental orthodoxy for my spiritual education. If you don't, or you reject that, we may well be wasting time debating each other. This may be a whole other topic for debate - Fundamentalism vs...?...whatever orthodoxy "TP" subscribes to. So, it truly is your choice. I have little to gain or lose. It really is about a pleasurable journey to understanding what we believe. If it's not, its not worth my time. I'm a dad, a husband, a student, and much more. If it's not fun, I have too many other things to do.

I have already responded to this question. Lets hear what you yourself think. You did? What was it? It won't kill you to answer this again (if you ever did to begin with). Also, as a condition for consideration of any further debate with me, I want your complete definition of literal. Your choice.

Good post!

Their creepy mustaches!

LOL RH, you're a trip...with the bold red "incorrect" signs like this was a game show or something.

It isn't the law's job to decide morality. The law's job is to ensure that people cannot interfere with the freedoms of others. (Or at least limit such things as much as possible) Who makes the laws?

Tell that to the Swedes. They legalized Homosexual Marriage first like Ten years ago. The First nation to do so. Last I heard there was a serious movement by some people to legalize NAMBLA type activity. It actually had the backing of some in the society. Of course it's all Relative. It's not a fall far down once your at the bottom of morality. The next step to more evil will be easier after the first letting go. Peace, Dave If we don't stand up for morality, who will?

TP, What is the criteria for identifying the Messiah from the Old Testament?

What is your definition of "literal"? Is it a word for word translation that doesn't leave room for the figurative speech that clearly exists in the Old and New testaments?

So, if someone shows up to a church and feels rejected or unaccepted because they don't fit a certain economic or social profile and they choose to leave, this is not something the church should be concerned with? Should the church stick their heads in the sand and say that those people couldn't handle the accountability and discipline? I've been to churches where this is prevalent. Go find another church you say, I haven't found a church yet that didn't have this problem to some degree. I'd say its rarely about accountability and discipline and mostly about people looking down their noses at others. Talk to the preacher about it and you usually don't get very far. Typically because the people who are looking down their noses at other people are also the ones writing the biggest checks. Have you ever heard of a preacher or church leader holding the "big giver" accountable to what the book of James has to say about this? I haven't. This is just one example. People also prefer to keep their families away from the gossip and slander that occurs as well. Is this true for every church every time? I doesn't matter. It's the PERCEPTION that exists that turns people off to our churches. People are sick of it. They have to endure in their schools, at work, and in other segments of our society. They shouldn't have to endure at their church of all places. So you can continue to keep your head in the sand while people are leaving the church in droves, or you can wake up to this reality and position your church to address the REAL problem. Passing up on reading the book or considering the data speaks volumes as to why this problem will not go away.