Part 39 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

Not according to the Holy Bible which is the Word of God. What source did you get that from? In my view your source is not very accurate/reliable unlike the Word of God.

Ok thanks trev for your post, will continue later on.

 

But what about the evidence that there seems to be validity to the Jewish idea of a Gilgul Cycle?

Isn't that same evidence that seems to indicate that the Jewish thinkers were onto something with their ideas on that topic also evidence, [perhaps not PROOF but surely 'evidence] .... for a DESIGNER or planner for that Gilgul Cycle / reincarnation to the mindset of Hindus and Buddhists????


The Dr. Ian Stevenson research... did he prove reincarnation?


1Now as Jesus passed by, He saw a man who was blind from birth. 2And His disciples asked Him, saying, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”
3Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but that the works of God should be revealed in him. 4I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work.5As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”
John 9: 1-5




Dr. Ian Stevenson’s Reincarnation Research

 

Only in your imagination. If we didn't eat cows, pigs, chickens, turkeys, etc., there wouldn't be any because they are bred and raised as a business by ranchers. So that they live at all is due to man, not to nature. If you can't bear the thought of killing and eating an animal, then so be it. That is you. Personally, God by his spirit compels me to repent of my sins, such as pride, unforgiveness, unrepentance, lust, contentiousness, and so forth. But never has he said that what I eat for nourishment is sinful. That is me. This is what the God of Christianity conveyed to Peter, an original Christian:
"And Peter saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:

Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven." Acts 10:11-16

So when you say that Christians are sinners for eating animals, that is your personal opinion, not the word of the God of Christianity.

 

Sorry. I don't know what that is. If it is evidence I'd like to know about it.

Huh? What does that ^^^ say again?

I know from experience that it is possible for a person who is sensitive enough to become aware of conditions, feelings of others, thoughts of others, and even past historical events. It's very rare. But it's common enough that I have encountered it with certainty. So I cannot exclude the possibility of a rare person becoming so intimately aware of events and minds of the past that they believe they were alive long ago and that they are remembering it. Yet it is not reproducible at will in others. And there is never any tangible evidence to prove it happened, although records and history can prove such a person lived and did such things as the "reincarnationist" believes they experienced.

So no, there is no "proof". But there are surprisingly convincing anecdotes.

That quote says that we must work during this life if we are to be "resurrected" or "born of the water and the spirit" because once we are dead and gone we cannot do it because we are dead. And I don't understand how you see this as relevant.

 

To my thinking that question by the disciples of Messiah Yeshua - Jesus seems to indicate that they.....
like many Jewish thinkers of that time period......

believed that the human soul or spirit existed somehow even before their physical birth..... or even conception?!

How could that man or his parents "sin" previous to when he was born?????


What did Zechariah mean by his questions about Zerubbabel?

Did the Prophet Zechariah believe that some part of Zerubbabel would reincarnate???

Zechariah 4:
4 And the angel that talked with me came again, and waked me, as a man that is wakened out of his sleep.

2 And said unto me, What seest thou? And I said, I have looked, and behold a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon, and seven pipes to the seven lamps, which are upon the top thereof:

3 And two olive trees by it, one upon the right side of the bowl, and the other upon the left side thereof.

4 So I answered and spake to the angel that talked with me, saying, What are these, my lord?

5 Then the angel that talked with me answered and said unto me, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.

6 Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the Lord unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts.

7 Who art thou, O great mountain? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain: and he shall bring forth the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace unto it.

8 Moreover the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,

9 The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also finish it; and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto you.

10 For who hath despised the day of small things? for they shall rejoice, and shall see the plummet in the hand of Zerubbabel with those seven; they are the eyes of the Lord, which run to and fro through the whole earth.

11 Then answered I, and said unto him, What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof?

12 And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?

13 And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.

14 Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

 

Right. So you select and interpret a bit of the Bible to make your point, I select one of the Ten Commandments to make mine.
Does your Bible related point take precedence over mine?
Isn’t that what preachers tend to do? Declare they are right and the ordinary inquisitive man in the street using common sense is wrong…oh and don’t forget the donation!
While we’re at it you say Peter was an ‘original’ Christian which implies he is a Christian of a higher strata than others? Is that what you mean?
I don’t say Christians are sinners for eating animals, simply that they are either not Christians according to the Bible, or are hypocrites.
Hmmmn, is hypocrisy a sin to a Christian?

 

No, again like I've already said before there is evidence for the existence of God it's just that you're in denial of them. That's why I'm a believer because the evidence that I have accepted compels/convinces me to believe in the Creator Almighty God.

I get it that the evidence that compels/convinces me does the opposite for you. Most who deny evidence for God demand forms of proof or levels of certainty that are either irrelevant or unreasonable. Looking at logic, experience and empirical observations, there is much evidence for the existence of God.

What?...do you want the Almighty to come and visit you one night and tuck you into bed after He reassures you He is God? He'll have cookies and warm milk with you, tell you Biblical stories from the past, show you a video of the real life event of Moses parting the Red Sea?

Or perhaps you prefer once in a while He should align the stars at night for all to see in such a way that they write/spell out, "I am God, I exist"...lol

Ok thanks Kode for your post.

 

If God is everywhere and all powerful then it would be easy for him or her to come round to my place at night, tuck me in and give me a cup of tea and some biscuits.
Is that really too much to ask?

Tell you what has intrigued me, well two things actually. I think that if there is a God it is something within you that somehow helps you to do the right thing, consider morality and live by it.
It has also been said, fasten your seat belts folks, that wanting to believe is the same as believing, and trying to pray is the same as praying.

 

Well, I only explain the hidden spiritual meanings in the bible: "the meat of the word". I don't bother with every verse or story because many of them are not good candidates for spiritual truth, but just in some cases the ramblings of ancient writers with an opinion.

 

Oh so you've made up your own meaning of the word "cult". Well the meaning as we Christians understand it to be is: “a religious group that denies one or more of the fundamentals of biblical truth.”

To deny essential truth/s of that religion is a cult and so a Christian cult will deny one or more of the fundamental truths of Christianity while still claiming to be Christian.

A cult claims to be part of a religion, yet it denies essential truth(s) of that religion. Therefore, a Christian cult will deny one or more of the fundamental truths of Christianity while still claiming to be Christian.

So teachings of believing that Lord Jesus was not God and that salvation is not by faith alone are examples of Christian cults.

I am happy to say I am not a member of a Christian cult and so at the moment I will be saved.

Speaking about being "saved", at the moment you and every other non-believer will not be saved unless you become Christians.
.
You and all other non-believers have no excuse for not knowing God. You all know the truth about Him because He has made it obvious to you all. For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made you all can clearly see His invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature.

We Read in Scripture:

God’s Anger at Sin

18 But God shows his anger from heaven against all sinful, wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness.[a] 19 They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. 20 For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. Romans 1:18-20 NLT

Footnotes
1:18 Or who, by their wickedness, prevent the truth from being known.

Ok thanks Kode for your post.

 

You don't seem to understand what "tangible evidence" is. It shows when you refer to "evidence that I have accepted". There's no need to "accept" evidence. It is there for all to see and declare.

No! I'm convinced by evidence! My background is in chemistry and science. But you haven't presented any tangible evidence. You're only presented myth that you've chosen to believe.

Ok. How's this for evidence: I studied the early Christian monastics and their writings (St. John of the Cross, Meister Eckhart, Mme. Jeanne Guyon, St. Catherine of Sienna, St. Catherine of Genoa, Origen, Dionysius, and Julian of Norwich to name a few. Then I practiced for years their described methods of meditating on the bible. As a result I now know what "The Presence" is, what "The Anointing" is and what "Unconditional Love" is because I experienced them all and more. The spiritual meaning of verses were miraculously revealed to me. I say "miraculously" because as I sat there deep in meditation on the verse, having asked for "light" and understanding, and had no idea of the meaning, suddenly in seconds whole explanations in detail were dumped into my awareness. In one or two seconds I went from not knowing the spiritual meaning of "I am the morning star" to having an entire explanation that tied to other verses that referred to "the morning star". And the same happened for countless other verses. I know what "the circumcision of the heart" is, what "baptism" is, and what "whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it" means. I know what the "Trinity" is and that it is a valid, spiritual truth. I also know what milk vs. strong meat is and that since nearly all Christians feed only on milk, they are not ready for "strong meat" and so they not only are unwilling or unable to understand it, but they reject it and I've even been accused of "having a devil", which showed their distrust for the God they claimed to worship.

In the end my inquiry led me out the other end so that now I understand what it's all about and why "believers" fear it.

You're free to be sarcastic and cheeky if you wish, but can you explain why the Christ in The Revelation says (1) "I am the ... bright and morning star" and also (2) "he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, . . . I will give him the morning star"?

Show us the depth of your understanding of this. Believers want to know what it means.

 

Then 99.99% of Christians are cultists because they deny the meaning of Gal 4:27 as it relates to 1st Corin. 6:17, they deny1st John 3:6, and 1st John 5:18, and Colossians 3:11, and they deny the connection that 2nd Corin 4:4 has with Genesis 1:26-27.

How much more of a denial of the most essential truth of Christianity could there be than to deny the most personal and intimate relationship Christ has with the human, as I explained immediately above by the denial of the spiritual meaning of those verses???

Then as I suggested above, nearly all of Christianity is, by your own words, a cult.

See? There you go! You are rejecting the meaning of ...
John 3:5 - "Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit."

Romans 2:29 - "but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter"

Matt. 19:29 - And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life

Romans 6:4 - "Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life."

2nd Timothy 2:11-12 - "Here is a trustworthy saying: If we died with him, we will also live with him; if we endure, we will also reign with him

PLUS!!!!!
1 John 3:3
Gal 5:24
1st Cor 5:7
Rev 3:21

These are ALL rejected including the most LITERAL meaning, by almost all Christians!

If any of that were true, you would not only understand all I've said, but you would rejoice at what I've said.

LOL!!!!! I'll be happy to take my chances.

Let's see you explain how salvation is by faith alone when considering the words of ....
Matt. 19:29
2nd Timothy 2:11-12
1 John 3:3
Gal 5:24
1st Cor 5:7
and
Rev 3:21


This should be good!

 

Your Bible is wrong. History will tell you otherwise. As will Archaeology. At the time of supposed Abraham (2100/2000 BCE)Ur was ruled by either Sumerians or Elamites - depending on the actual dates. The Chaldean were a people in the 8th century who joined with the Babylonians to create what was called the NeoBabylonian Empire - now usually known as the Chaldean Empire. Your view is clouded by your refusal to study outside the Bible. It's like believing Gone with the Wind is the genuine US history and rejecting the proven history.

 

For all your writings there is no proof that Jesus was anything but a Jewish Preacher. If you wish I can show you, using the Bible, Laws and Customs of the time that the Nativity story is simply made up by Matthew and Luke and they actually contradict each other. In fact the two stories end up with Matthew sending Joseph to Egypt for at least 2 years while Luke sends the family home to Nazareth after 40 days where they stay till Jesus is 13.
By the way don't quote me GotQuestions answers. I showed them their errors and they had no answer - particularly as to why Jesus was in Egypt AND Nazareth at the same time.

 

[QUOTE="Kode, post: 1074737594, member: 70481

But you haven't presented any tangible evidence. You're only presented myth that you've chosen to believe.


[/QUOTE]


As I asked Mitt R., are you suggesting that a person has the ability to consciously engender a belief in someone or something?

 

I have given y'all a source for tangible evidence and asked you to discuss it.... you won't even investigate the evidence from the Shroud of Turin.... you honestly can't tell me it's a hoax.

 

So what is the Shroud of Turin? You cannot, honestly, explain it away. Now examine the evidence... do a complete study

 

The Shroud is controversial. So it isn't "evidence" unless it is flawed evidence.

 

Shroud in Turin.



Are the Shroud of Turin and the True Cross genuine relics?
Discussion of the True Cross and the Shroud of Turin.
See all videos for this article
Scholarly analyses—attempting to use scientific methods to prove or disprove its authenticity—have been applied to the shroud since the late 19th century. It was early noticed (189 that the sepia-tone images on the shroud seem to have the character of photographic negatives rather than positives. Beginning in the 1970s, tests were made to determine whether the images were the result of paints (or other pigments), scorches, or other agents; none of the tests proved conclusive. In 1988 the Vatican provided three laboratories in different countries with postage-stamp-sized pieces of the shroud’s linen cloth. Having subjected these samples to carbon-14 dating, all three laboratories concluded that the cloth of the shroud had been made sometime between 1260 and 1390. However, some scientists raised doubts about the researchers’ methodology. Upon receiving the results of the tests, the Vatican encouraged scientists to conduct further investigations of the shroud’s authenticity and recommended that Christians continue to venerate the shroud as an inspiring image of Christ.

 

Thank you Kode for helping me understand that some people will deny even an investigation of the evidence.... I did not expect any different from you. May our Lord someday open your eyes to the truth , the way and the life. I pray this in the name of Lord Yeshua

 

First let me bring up my entire statement I made to Mircea in response to what he said below back on Oct 27, 2021 on this thread on pg.1 post #2.

So basically what we have here is member Mircea doesn't believe that Lord Jesus was crucified and died on the cross, Mircea says the Lord fled the area. And I respond as you see above.

So now to your question, let me ask you, what are you suggesting with that question of yours? Elaborate more on it maybe I should request before I answer it.

Ok thanks rstrats for your post.

 

That a start with old and outdated information... some nuclear physicist did experiments to understand how the image and it's billions of data points left the imprint of the body in the Shroud. It was a burst of radiation from a particular band of the EM scale... they have an estimate on how much energy would be required to imprint soething the size of the Shroud... enough that you could power a city (Ha ha that fact is what always tripped up the bit of sci-fi "beaming me up" fantasy.... a lot of information and a lot of energy... more than even the Enterprise could easily giv e up)

 

Post #3049 was to clear up Post #3045.

 

Can you show me PROOF that the Shroud is not only the one that wrapped Jesus, but that the image was created by a means unknown to us?