JESUS IS THE ANTI-CHRIST
Posts
Total:
46
Who can deny? No-one!
What do you even mean by christ/antichrist? And why would Jesus (providing he was even a historical figure) be either?
-->
@secularmerlin
You are blocked for a reason. This is a perfect example of you either being severely mentally disordered or sarcastic, I'm not sure which. The answer is blatantly because Jesus Christ is called Jesus Christ.
Yes but what does christ mean in this context and why does being called someth8ng make it necessarily true? Is it just a subjective judgement?
Pot meet kettle...
"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world."
-->
@Mopac
and what if the false prophet WAS HIM?
-->
@RationalMadman
Well it is actually a title - Jesus THE Christ . It simply means Jesus - The Anointed. I am puzzled then why Jesus or how Jesus can be The Anti Anointed when he is the Anointed.The answer is blatantly because Jesus Christ is called Jesus Christ.
Can you put me right on that?
-->
@Mopac
"Beloved,believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God:
“Try” Does that mean question?
-->
@RationalMadman
When the Israelites demanded a King, Godd used the prophet of Samuel to tell them that they were fools, because God is their King.
Fast forward in time hundred of years, Jesus fulfills every line of prophesy since because to call Jesus King is to call God King. No more need for a human king. The king is God.
And truly, rhis is how it always has been. God is sovereign over all things.
The reason why this is confusing to most people is because they believe what I call the Muslim Jesus... which identifies Jesus Christ as a man. The Jesus Christ of Christian theology is not a man who lived and preached for 30 something odd years, but God who was always here and took the form of a man.
So proper Christianity doesn't worship a man as God, we worship God through man. We are, after all, people.
-->
@Stephen
Do you understand metaphors, lies and puzzles?
-->
@Mopac
I will explain to you where you are going wrong only if you are willing first to consider you could be wrong.
When the Israelites demanded a King, Godd used the prophet of Samuel to tell them that they were fools, because God is their King.
Well god didn't "use Samuel" very well did he?
Because the man selected to become the first monarchical ruler of Israel was Saul, son of Kish, a wealthy Benjamite. And who was it that anointed SAUL first king of Israel?
YES!!!!!!
SAMUEL!!!!!!!!!
It makes absolutely no sense does it that one the one hand SAMUEL was calling everyone " FOOLS", yet he, god's being high priest went ahead and anointed a king anyway. Why did he go against his god's judgment? Why did he not say 'I will have no part of this'?
Let's hear your explanation.
The Jesus Christ of Christian theology is not a man who lived and preached for 30 something odd years,
You don't have a clue about your own scriptures do you. Jesus' ministry " preached" last at least 12 months and two years. at most.
-->
@Stephen
Yes, it is commonly accepted that the Jesus of the gospel accounts peached for around 3 years. Lived 30 something odd years.
As for everything else, I already know better to correct you, because you'll just ignore it anyway.
Instead I will say that you are off the mark.
But I will say this...
Everything is done according to God's will, whether or not how things are done make sense to you or fit your own arbitrary sense of aesthetics.
-->
@RationalMadman
I think that goes both ways.
-->
@Mopac
No it doesn't
-->
@Mopac
Yes, it is commonly accepted that the Jesus of the gospel accounts peached for around 3 years.
Then why do you say he "preached for some 30 odd years" when you know that to be wrong?
As for everything else, I already know better to correct you, because you'll just ignore it anyway.
I won't ignore anything. I never do. I even take the time to read your pointless links that explain absolutely nothing.
I will be interested to know why on the one hand Samuel called everyone "fools" via god's message to the Israelites for wanting a king and then went and anointed a king going against his god's judgment? You don't have an answer do you.
Instead I will say that you are off the mark.
That is no answer is it. That tells us all here that you simply do not have an answer, do you? YOU NEVER DO have a single answer to questions concerning your own statements, EVER
But I will say this... Everything is done according to God's will,
Well it wasn't was it? THE ANOINTING OF SAUL WAS AGAINST GOD'S WILL.God told the Israelites they were fools for wanting a king, he told them, he(god) was their king, but Samuel went ahead and anointed Saul as king of Israel anyway. It doesn't make sense and you can't explain it.
whether or not how things are done make sense to you or fit your own arbitrary sense of aesthetics.
No they don't, on the surface. It shouldn't stop you explaining this anomaly though, should it? You brought it into the conversation not anyone else. it is up to you to explain it. Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock.
-->
@RationalMadman
You don't understand my religion, so I have no good reason to accept that you can be right. You don't even understand what you are arguing against.
So that is my current opinion on the matter.
You don't understand my religion,
If it is Christianity I understand perfectly the underlying story of The Christ and his failed mission. Which is something you could never face and or admit.
so I have no good reason to accept that you can be right.
Of course you don't. I don't expect you to. i just want explanations and answers. I am not here to defend the scripture, that is up to you should you decide to.
It works like this. I highlight what I believe to be a problem with the scripture, and I say why believe it to be a problem. It is then up to or anyone else to explain away the problem that I have highlighted if you/they choose to do so. I don't care what you think of me, it is irrelevant what you think of me.
You don't even understand what you are arguing against.
Well I shall make it clear AGAIN. I am arguing that the scriptures, as they have come down to us, are unreliable and problematic in the extreme. These gospellers cannot even agree on the day that the Christ was crucified can they? Of all the dates to get confused about they have to pick the day that Christianity stands on, and they couldn't get that right.
So that is my current opinion on the matter.
What is?
-->
@Stephen
You are responding to a post I made to rationalmadman.
Your arguing against the scriptures is a waste of time and totally destructive. You don't know the intent of scriptures.
Jesus is the fulfillment of scripture. You don't know Jesus.
Your arguing against the scriptures
I am. I am saying they are unreliable and problematic as they have come down to us and have been taught to us. I am saying there is definitely another underlying story that the gospellers are desperate to hide.
You don't know the intent of scriptures.
I don't think you do . The scripture wasn't written for the likes of me or you in the 121st century. You and Christians as a whole lose sight of the fact the this Jesus was a JEW. He was King of the JEWS, He was High Priest of the JEWISH church and he should have ruled over a JEWISH nation.
Jesu would have been appalled that a whole new religion had sprang up in his name.
Jesus is the fulfillment of scripture. You don't know Jesus.
You have not a single shred of evidence to prove that. If you sincerely believe you do have evidence for your claim,, start a thread on it explaining how you know and why you believe it to be so.
-->
@Stephen
Why should I listen to you when you respond to half of my sentences?
Go away and foam at the mouth to someone who cares what you think.
-->
@Mopac
Why should I listen to you when you respond to half of my sentences?
I have said above already that you don't have to listen to me. I don't care. But you making claims then refusing to support them just makes you look stupid.
Jesus is the fulfillment of scripture. You don't know Jesus.
You have not a single shred of evidence to prove that. If you sincerely believe you do have evidence for your claim,, start a thread on it explaining how you know and why you believe it to be so.
I can safely take you that you do not have any evidence for that claim and are just spouting stuff for the sake of, it. Nothing new there then. This is what most Christians do when they , like you, have painted themselves into a corner.
-->
@Stephen
You have no evidence for that claim."You have not a single shred of evidence..."
And your arrogance makes you unworthy to receive evidence.
Your crusade is misguided. Maybe in the future you will realize that, but I am not going to be able to convince you.
Good luck.
-->
@Mopac
You say yo me
Mopac wrote: Jesus is the fulfillment of scripture. You don't know Jesus.
I say you have no evidence: and you come back with this
Mopac wrote: You have no evidence for that claim.
As if you have shown me evidence. You haven't shown me a single thing that supports your claim that "Jesus is the fulfilment of the scriptures".
That is my evidence you fool. Otherwise I am sure you would have produced evidence.
And your arrogance makes you unworthy to receive evidence.
That means you have none. You don't understand your own damn scriptures. You are a fool.
Your crusade is misguided.
What "crusade" would that be?
Maybe in the future you will realize that,
I only realise that the scriptures are nonsense, that is to they make absolutely no sense.
but I am not going to be able to convince you.
Not if you cannot answer questions concerning your own claims, your not. That's the trouble, you are laim, you do not know your own scriptures , your very limited knowledge of them is that of a child repeating the nativity scene verbatim.
Lets test my opinion of you, and how little you know these scriptures.
Why do the gospel writers play down the temple confrontation (turning over of the tables Matthew 21:12-13), when in truth it was a full blown insurrection and not a 10 minute hissy fit thrown by Jesus as the scriptures would have us believe?
Let us all now see the depth of your biblical knowledge of these scriptures.
8 days later
-->
@RationalMadman
I find it hilarious that some atheists argue about someone they don't believe in. It's like arguing about the Easter bunny. Surely, it's a sign of a severe mental disorder.
-->
@Grugore
Exactly, atheists have to treat religious people like children with invisible friends.They don't believe in the invisible friends but are forced to talk about it as if it exists or at the very least, curb ones disbelief in order to relate to the child, or the religious person.I find it hilarious that some atheists argue about someone they don't believe in. It's like arguing about the Easter bunny.
Surely, it's a sign of a severe mental disorder.
Adults with invisible friends? Perhaps, you're right.
31 days later
-->
@Goldtop
I guess whomever was forcing you to talk must have released you. I hope you feel more free now.They don't believe in the invisible friends but are forced to talk about it....
-->
@Mopac
see: Auschwitz.Everything is done according to God's will,