The case for the Historical Jesus

Author: Shila

Posts

Total: 619
Topic's author
#301
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
--> @BrotherD.Thomas
 All you are doing [shila], like Miss Tradesecret, is to propose a diversion tactic to take the lime-light off you you making a complete fool of yourself relating to the Bible!   

Stephen: Indeed Brother D. This is all they have left once the mask slips. 👍
Neither want to seriously discuss scripture once they have been shown to be so bible ignorant. 
Stephen, you and BrotherD. Only want to talk about Tradesecret. You have still not explained why you two call him Reverend which is a title of respect and at the same time attack him calling him a pervert. Is that some kind of love hate relationship you three have developed over the years?


Topic's author
#302
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
Shila, in being a woman, will be going to Hell upon her demise anyway, therefore her time here in going against God's word is all for naught,

Addressing once again your Bible stupidity in your post #285;

YOUR PITIFUL QUOTE IN CONTINUING TO SLAP JESUS IN THE FACE AS A WOMAN THAT IS NOT TO TEACH:   "Having established the case for the Historical Jesus. The question on everyone’s mind has to be why and how did the Historical Jesus die?"

JESUS DIDN'T DIE BIBLE FOOL SHILA!

DIE: to cease to live; undergo the complete and permanent cessation of all vital functions; become dead.
Listen up Bible fool Shila, Jesus DID NOT remain dead, because He came back after a 3 day tomb nap and walked out as being flesh and blood, understood Bible fool, huh?  In the real primitive bible sacrifices the individual or animal remained DEAD, which is a true meaningful sacrifice!  Deduced, since our Jesus did not remain dead, he therefore did not die by remaining dead as the definition in how one dies shown above! 
Jesus did die, he was crucified and buried in a tomb.
 A factual and real sacrifice is that you remain DEAD, period, where one does NOT come back to life three days later!  HELLO?!  As an example, a true sacrifice  is when USA  soldiers remained dead after they gave their lives to protect the United States of America in WW2!

The part of the Historical Jesus is called the Resurrection. Which I will cover next. One has to die first before one can be resurrected. Jesus died and 3 days later was resurrected.

SHILA the continued Bible fool, the question on everyone’s mind has to be when are you going to TRUTHFULLY show that our Jesus we worship, as the Serial Killer Yahweh God incarnate, was embarrassingly, greedy, jealous, selfish, self-centered, petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capricious, and malevolent!
Your view of Jesus is totally unacceptable.
I noticed you have repeatedly called Jesus a serial killer.
Here you added more to your list of blasphemous insults by saying the Jesus you worship as the Serial Killer Yahweh God incarnate, was embarrassingly, greedy, jealous, selfish, self-centered, petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capricious, and malevolent!
The aforementioned biblical axioms about our Jesus as God of the Bible has been accepted by me as a true Christian upon this Religion Forum!  Shila, do you accept the above facts about are Jesus as well, and if not, where do you get the authority to NOT accept them?  Would you be to SCARED to discuss said facts about our Jesus?
You want Shila to discuss the facts about your jesus which you have been worshipping all your life and only now shared it with us.
Now I know the Jesus you worship, as the Serial Killer Yahweh God incarnate, was embarrassingly, greedy, jealous, selfish, self-centered, petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capricious, and malevolent!

Any wonder you are such a mean spirited miserable old man. Look at how warped your mind has become with all the Bible slapping your received growing up.
#303
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
Stephen, You two have known each other for over 4 years. 

I don't know him at all. I only know what he has volunteered about himself to this forum on the WWW


You two are lying. So which is it?

You must have missed this what I already posted at #290 above and have repeated for you below. Try reading it, taking your time.
Tradesecret wrote: Perhaps it might be worthwhile knowing that I have never said I was a reverend or asked to be called one. Infact Stephen lied about this as well - and when challenged, came up with nary a response.

I have said it many times to you before REVEREND, you dulcet dunce.  You must be the only Chaplain & Pastor in the whole world that doesn't know he's to be addressed as Reverend.


Chaplains to the Armed Services
  1. The Reverend A B Smith RN (or CF or RAF).   https://www.crockford.org.uk/faq/how-to-address-the-clergy

TRADESECRET WROTE: 
I am also a chaplain to our Countries Defence forces, a position I could not have without proper qualifications.  #20


The title Reverend applies to Pastors too. 

TRADESECRET WROTE:
But in my role as a pastor - which I also do, I counsel in pastoral care.#20

And is all you have ever done is deny that you are a Reverend.

TRADESECRET WROTE:

  And I am not a reverend. #29
I keep telling you, you are very ill, Reverend.


Shila wrote: drop the name Reverend out of respect for the Christian institution you belong to.

Shila,  He has no respect for anyone. He's a lying narcissist that I believe suffers from severe Munchausen's. The believability of lie and the fantasy are of no consequence to someone in his condition. SEE HERE>>#207

He may not want to be called Reverend, but he is stuck with that title until he simply admits he is a compulsive pathological liar.
You have been suckered into supporting these lying clowns lies and should know better. It makes you a worse liar then he is. You are more a disgrace than he ever will be..

#304
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas

Shila weote: "Having established the case for the Historical Jesus. The question on everyone’s mind has to be why and how did the Historical Jesus die?"


Brother D. Wrote:

JESUS DIDN'T DIE BIBLE FOOL SHILA!
DIE: to cease to live; undergo the complete and permanent cessation of all vital functions; become dead.
Listen up Bible fool Shila, Jesus DID NOT remain dead, because He came back after a 3 day tomb nap and walked out as being flesh and blood, understood Bible fool, huh?  In the real primitive bible sacrifices the individual or animal remained DEAD, which is a true meaningful sacrifice!  Deduced, since our Jesus did not remain dead, he therefore did not die by remaining dead as the definition in how one dies shown above! 
Interesting that the Christians close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears when the obvious is pointed out to them, isn't it Brother D. ?

There is also a very good case to be made that Jesus survived the cross and didn't die in any sense of the word. 


Brother D. Wrote:

 A factual and real sacrifice is that you remain DEAD, period, where one does NOT come back to life three days later!  HELLO?!  As an example, a true sacrifice  is when USA  soldiers remained dead after they gave their lives to protect the United States of America in WW2!

In a nut-shell, Btother D.  👍

Topic's author
#305
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
Stephen, You two have known each other for over 4 years. 

I don't know him at all. I only know what he has volunteered about himself to this forum on the WWW


You two are lying. So which is it?

You must have missed this what I already posted at #290 above and have repeated for you below. Try reading it, taking your time.
Tradesecret wrote: Perhaps it might be worthwhile knowing that I have never said I was a reverend or asked to be called one. Infact Stephen lied about this as well - and when challenged, came up with nary a response.

I have said it many times to you before REVEREND, you dulcet dunce.  You must be the only Chaplain & Pastor in the whole world that doesn't know he's to be addressed as Reverend.


Chaplains to the Armed Services
  1. The Reverend A B Smith RN (or CF or RAF).   https://www.crockford.org.uk/faq/how-to-address-the-clergy

TRADESECRET WROTE: 
I am also a chaplain to our Countries Defence forces, a position I could not have without proper qualifications.  #20


The title Reverend applies to Pastors too. 

TRADESECRET WROTE:
But in my role as a pastor - which I also do, I counsel in pastoral care.#20

And is all you have ever done is deny that you are a Reverend.

TRADESECRET WROTE:

  And I am not a reverend. #29
I keep telling you, you are very ill, Reverend.


Shila wrote: drop the name Reverend out of respect for the Christian institution you belong to.

Shila,  He has no respect for anyone. He's a lying narcissist that I believe suffers from severe Munchausen's. The believability of lie and the fantasy are of no consequence to someone in his condition. SEE HERE>>#207

He may not want to be called Reverend, but he is stuck with that title until he simply admits he is a compulsive pathological liar.
You have been suckered into supporting these lying clowns lies and should know better. It makes you a worse liar then he is. You are more a disgrace than he ever will be..
Besides the title one has to earn that respect to be called a Reverend. It almost seems like you insist he be called Reverend even though he does not want to be called Reverend and prefers Pastor.

Stephen: He may not want to be called Reverend, but he is stuck with that title until he simply admits he is a compulsive pathological liar.
Knowingly calling a pervert Reverend is mocking the Christian institutions. That’s like calling a known pedophile  Catholic Priest, Father.

I think you and BrotherD. are here  to mock Jesus and Christian institutions that bear his name.

Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.
#306
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
Besides the title one has to earn that respect to be called a Reverend.

So you still insist on perpetuating lies on his behalf.  


he does not want to be called Reverend and prefers Pastor.

But he is a Reverend. That is his title. He has claimed to be both a Pastor and a Chaplain to the military.  Why are you denying facts?

Or he is LYING and you are helping him perpetuate his lies. 

How to Address a Pastor, Minister, Christian Clergy
Pastor With a Doctorate
—-Envelope or address block on letter or email:
—-—-The Reverend (Full Name)
—-—-(Church)
—-—-(Address)  how to address a protestant minister
—-Salutation: how to address a protestant minister
—-—-Dear Dr. (Surname):
Pastor Without a Doctorate
—-Envelope or address block on letter or email:
—-—-The Reverend (Full Name)
—-—-(Church)



Chaplains to the Armed Services
  1. The Reverend A B Smith RN (or CF or RAF)
  2. Padre, or Padre Smith
  3. The Padre, or Padre Smith

I don't care if yu or the reverend cannot accept these facts. But they are facts.

So get your thread back on course, unless all this is about the Reverend helping you distract from the Brother making you look like a bible ignorant dunce. 



Topic's author
#307
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5


Shila weote: "Having established the case for the Historical Jesus. The question on everyone’s mind has to be why and how did the Historical Jesus die?"


Brother D. Wrote:

JESUS DIDN'T DIE BIBLE FOOL SHILA!
DIE: to cease to live; undergo the complete and permanent cessation of all vital functions; become dead.
Listen up Bible fool Shila, Jesus DID NOT remain dead, because He came back after a 3 day tomb nap and walked out as being flesh and blood, understood Bible fool, huh?  In the real primitive bible sacrifices the individual or animal remained DEAD, which is a true meaningful sacrifice!  Deduced, since our Jesus did not remain dead, he therefore did not die by remaining dead as the definition in how one dies shown above! 
Stephen: Interesting that the Christians close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears when the obvious is pointed out to them, isn't it Brother D. ? 

There is also a very good case to be made that Jesus survived the cross and didn't die in any sense of the word. 
That is why it is important to prove Jesus died and was resurrected. This makes Christianity unique among all religions. The death and resurrection of Jesus.
If Jesus didn’t die there is no proof of resurrection. 

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17

16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.


Brother D. Wrote:

 A factual and real sacrifice is that you remain DEAD, period, where one does NOT come back to life three days later!  HELLO?!  As an example, a true sacrifice  is when USA  soldiers remained dead after they gave their lives to protect the United States of America in WW2!

Stephen: In a nut-shell, Btother D.  👍

Having established the case for the Historical Jesus. The question on everyone’s mind has to be why and how did the Historical Jesus die?
Jesus was crucified and he resurrected in three days just as he had predicted.
John 2:19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”

Let us read “the words of Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian:
Let him that blasphemes God (Greek blasphēmēsas theon) be stoned, then hung for a day, and buried ignominiously and in obscurity. (Josephus, Antiquities, 4.202)20
In other words, when it comes to a case of blasphemy against God himself, execution alone is not enough. The offense requires crucifixion—being “hung” so that all can see the shame of the one who has dared to blaspheme God. Although under Rome it was not “lawful” for the Jewish leaders to put Jesus to death by stoning (John 18:31), they can still hand him over to be “hung” on a tree by the Romans. And that is what they do.”

In “Both the Synoptic Gospels and the Gospel of John testify to previous incidents when Jesus is accused of blasphemy during his public ministry:
And behold, some of the scribes said to themselves, “This man is blaspheming.” (Matthew 9:3)
Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, “Why does this man speak thus? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Mark 2:6-7)
[Jesus said:] “I and the Father are one.” The Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of these do you stone me?” The Jews answered him, “We stone you for no good work but for blasphemy; because you, being a man, make yourself God.” (John 10:30-33)

These other charges of blasphemy are consistently ignored by those who claim that Jesus was condemned to death for speaking against the Temple.21 The reason: this evidence poses great difficulties for those who contend that Jesus never claimed to be God. And that is one reason why such an idea fails as a historical explanation. In order to work, it has to ignore “or dismiss key pieces of evidence.22 According to the Gospels, Jesus of Nazareth was accused of and, ultimately, condemned for blasphemy because of who he claimed to be.
By the way, the evidence that Jesus was condemned for blasphemy isn’t just in the Synoptic Gospels; it’s also in the Gospel of John.23 Although John’s Gospel does not contain an account of Jesus’s proclamation before Caiaphas, it does report that the chief priests and scribes publically accused Jesus of blasphemy on the day of his crucifixion:
So Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, “Here is the man!” When the chief priests and the officers saw him, they cried out, “Crucify him, crucify him!” “Pilate said to them, “Take him yourselves and crucify him, for I find no crime in him.” The Jews answered him, “We have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because he has made himself the Son of God.” (John 19:5-7)

What is this law to which the chief priest and scribes are referring? It is the biblical law against blasphemy: “He who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:16).24 Thus, both the Synoptics and the Gospel of John agree that it is the charge of blasphemy that lands Jesus on the cross.
The evidence presented here suggests that the now popular idea that Jesus never claimed to be anything more than an ordinary human being totally fails to deal with the actual historical evidence. Jesus’s words and actions regarding the Temple might have got him hauled into the Jewish court, but it was what he said about himself that got him crucified.”

Topic's author
#308
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
Besides the title one has to earn that respect to be called a Reverend.

So you still insist on perpetuating lies on his behalf.  


he does not want to be called Reverend and prefers Pastor.

But he is a Reverend. That is his title. He has claimed to be both a Pastor and a Chaplain to the military.  Why are you denying facts?

Or he is LYING and you are helping him perpetuate his lies. 

How to Address a Pastor, Minister, Christian Clergy
Pastor With a Doctorate
—-Envelope or address block on letter or email:
—-—-The Reverend (Full Name)
—-—-(Church)
—-—-(Address)  how to address a protestant minister
—-Salutation: how to address a protestant minister
—-—-Dear Dr. (Surname):
Pastor Without a Doctorate
—-Envelope or address block on letter or email:
—-—-The Reverend (Full Name)
—-—-(Church)



Chaplains to the Armed Services
  1. The Reverend A B Smith RN (or CF or RAF)
  2. Padre, or Padre Smith
  3. The Padre, or Padre Smith
Stephen, you and BrotherD. Only want to talk about Tradesecret. You have still not explained why you two call him Reverend which is a title of respect and at the same time attack him calling him a pervert. Is that some kind of love hate relationship you three have developed over the years?

Read what Tradesecret accused you and BrotherD. of.
Tradesecret: “Perhaps it might be worthwhile knowing that I have never said I was a reverend or asked to be called one. Infact Stephen lied about this as well - and when challenged, came up with nary a response.  All his stalking left him with more egg on the face.

As for stalking, it is very clear Stephen is the no. 1 creepy stalker on this site.   Brother is coming close as no. 2. “

#309
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
Stephen, you and BrotherD. Only want to talk about Tradesecret.

 Stop it. You bring up the Reverend every chance you get.

You have perpetuated all conversations about the reverend, on nearly ALL of your threads or threads that you have resurrected, when I have asked you continually to stick with your topic.
Take it or leave it. A pastor and or chaplain are addressed as Reverend.

How to Address a Pastor, Minister, Christian Clergy
Pastor With a Doctorate
—-Envelope or address block on letter or email:
—-—-The Reverend (Full Name)
—-—-(Church)
—-—-(Address)  how to address a protestant minister
—-Salutation: how to address a protestant minister
—-—-Dear Dr. (Surname):
Pastor Without a Doctorate
—-Envelope or address block on letter or email:
—-—-The Reverend (Full Name)
—-—-(Church)



Chaplains to the Armed Services
  1. The Reverend A B Smith RN (or CF or RAF)
  2. Padre, or Padre Smith
  3. The Padre, or Padre Smith

I don't care if you or the Reverend cannot accept these facts. But they are facts. If you don't want to be discussing the Reverend, then simply stop forcing the conversation in his direction and bringing him up every other post that you make.

So get your thread back on course, unless all this is about the Reverend helping you distract from  Brother D. making you look like a bible ignorant dunce. 




Topic's author
#310
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
The resurrection of Jesus.

“First, what did it mean for Jesus’s disciples to claim that he had been “raised” from the dead? Second, why is it that so many Jews in the first century AD believed that Jesus really was raised from the dead? According to the Acts of the Apostles, within a couple years after Jesus’s death, some “five thousand” Jews came to believe in his “resurrection” (see “Acts 4:1-4). What was it that convinced them that the tomb of Jesus really was empty on Easter Sunday? How do we explain the historical fact of early Christian belief in the resurrection?
”
“What the Resurrection Is
What then does the resurrection mean? Let’s turn to the Gospel accounts and look at three points that are essential for understanding what the disciples were actually claiming when they said that Jesus had been “raised from the dead.”
“First, the resurrected Jesus has a body. He is not a ghost. This is perhaps clearest in Luke’s account of Jesus’s appearance to the disciples in the Upper Room:
As they were saying this, Jesus himself stood among them, and said to them, “Peace to you.” But they were startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit. And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have.” And when he had said this he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they still disbelieved for joy, and wondered, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate before them. (Luke 24:36-43)”

“Note well that the disciples’ first reaction is to assume that Jesus is a “spirit” (Greek pneuma). This shows us, for one thing, that they believed in ghosts! It also shows us that they were familiar with the idea of encountering the disembodied “spirit” of a dead person. In order to correct this misunderstanding, Jesus insists that he has “flesh and bones”—that is, that he has a real human body. And just in case the disciples have any doubts about the reality of his body, he asks them for something to eat! Although spirits might be able to do lots of things, because they lack bodies, sitting down to a nice meal of broiled fish is not one of them. There are few things more bodily than the act of eating.”

“Second, the resurrected Jesus has the same body that he had while he was alive. That’s why he still bears the wounds of the cross.13 Jesus implies as much when he shows his disciples “his hands and his feet” (Luke 24:40). The Gospel of John’s account of Jesus’s appearance to Thomas makes this explicit:
Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe.” Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but 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; do not be faithless, but believing.” “Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.” (John 20:24-29)
As this account makes very clear, the risen Jesus has not discarded his human body like an old garment. The crucifixion has literally left its marks on him, forever, but without conquering his life. Moreover, notice also that when Thomas is confronted with the reality of the resurrection, his response is an unequivocal affirmation of Jesus’s divinity: “My Lord and my God! (Greek ho kyrios mou kai ho theos mou)” (John 20:28).14 For Thomas, the resurrection of Jesus after his death vindicates the claims that Jesus made about his divinity during his life.”








#311
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,669
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@Shila
Why do you keep feeding these trolls?
Topic's author
#312
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
Stephen, you and BrotherD. Only want to talk about Tradesecret.

 Stop it. You bring up the Reverend every chance you get.

You have perpetuated all conversations about the reverend, on nearly ALL of your threads or threads that you have resurrected, when I have asked you continually to stick with your topic.
Take it or leave it. A pastor and or chaplain are addressed as Reverend.

How to Address a Pastor, Minister, Christian Clergy
Pastor With a Doctorate
—-Envelope or address block on letter or email:
—-—-The Reverend (Full Name)
—-—-(Church)
—-—-(Address)  how to address a protestant minister
—-Salutation: how to address a protestant minister
—-—-Dear Dr. (Surname):
Pastor Without a Doctorate
—-Envelope or address block on letter or email:
—-—-The Reverend (Full Name)
—-—-(Church)



Chaplains to the Armed Services
  1. The Reverend A B Smith RN (or CF or RAF)
  2. Padre, or Padre Smith
  3. The Padre, or Padre Smith

I don't care if you or the Reverend cannot accept these facts. But they are facts. If you don't want to be discussing the Reverend, then simply stop forcing the conversation in his direction and bringing him up every other post that you make.

So get your thread back on course, unless all this is about the Reverend helping you distract from  Brother D. making you look like a bible ignorant dunce. 
All your post says is Tradesecret is a Reverend by any standards. You and BrotherD. actually believe he has earned that title. Or were you two fooled into calling him Reverend?
Topic's author
#313
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Sidewalker

--> @Shila
Why do you keep feeding these trolls?
Romans 12:20. 'If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. ' No one is exempt from the call to feed the hungry, God calls us to meet the needs of even those we might call 'enemies'.


#314
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
Luke 14:27 And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.

You never said you are a reverend. But you did say all the other depraved things Stephen and BrotherD. accuse you of being. You can’t be a reverend and pervert but here you are making  that possible by admitting “that I have never said I was a reverend or asked to be called one.
Dear Shila,

While you are correct that I have never said I was a reverend and never asked to be called one, you are incorrect in relation to any so called "depraved things" Stephen and Brother accuse me off.  His retort in relation to chaplains in the defence forces is inaccurate. He can quote and link all he wants - but given he has never served he doesn't actually know how it really works. His explanation would exclude many pastors and chaplains from serving because many would never willingly or intentionally take on the title which they think is unbiblical.  And yet they serve. How does Stephen explain that conundrum? He doesn't - he just repeats his doctrine and links to a site which he thinks answers all questions. That is why he never passed high school. 

He also misunderstands completely why the presbyterian church does not call all of its pastors reverend.   Not every person serving in the ministry is ordained. Ordination is a necessary part of the process of obtaining the title reverend.  Many pastors and chaplains going into serve as chaplain in the defence force haven't been ordained. suitable qualified academically, professionally, and even in experience - yet not ordained. Many pastors see ordination as unnecessary.  But hey Stephen has his google links to specific links. So don't confuse him with the real facts.  He has lived so long in his home - in front of his computer that he rarely gets out of the house - let alone into the real world. 

I will concede that I have spoken in frustration at Stephen calling him some pretty horrible things in quite disgusting language.  I regretted doing so immediately and apologised. You can find my apologies on this site somewhere if you wish to check. Stephen of course thinks I was lying even in that apology and as such offers no forgiveness. That in my view is entirely up to him. He wishes to hold this against me and keep up his vendetta and resentment. 

On the other hand, despite all of the allegations of perversity and depravity, or even sexual experimentation, what are the concrete accusations? What I consider depraved is not the same as what others might think is depraved.    What I think is experimentation is not what others might consider experimentation.  Indeed if the studies of Kinsey are correct every person experiments.   There are no concrete accusations here - just vague suggestions.  

I have labeled myself depraved - in a theological sense.  That is NOT the same as labelling myself depraved in other ways.  The Theological doctrine of Total Depravity is also a general doctrine. This means that if it applies at all, then it applies to every person on this planet. If it is not true, then it does not apply to any person on this planet. What it is not is a specific doctrine.  Hence attempting to make it apply to me specifically as though it somehow makes me especially depraved is simply nonsense and the ravings of a person unacquainted with the doctrine of Total Depravity.  This is another reason the allegations simply roll of my back since they demonstrate ignorance. 

Brother D and Stephen are the number one stalkers on this site.  They are both fakes and frauds.  They accuse others of being liars but never quite produce the proof. They provide little snippets of evidence but never the killer blow.  Like most con artists they use a piece of fact and attempt to build up from there with speculation to try and sound like they know what they are talking.  

I am not perfect. Never have I claimed to be. But I am not a liar.  


#315
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
Another quack. How precious. Quick someone get the dogs. 


Topic's author
#316
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Tradesecret
Brother D and Stephen are the number one stalkers on this site.  They are both fakes and frauds.  They accuse others of being liars but never quite produce the proof. They provide little snippets of evidence but never the killer blow.  Like most con artists they use a piece of fact and attempt to build up from there with speculation to try and sound like they know what they are talking.  

I am not perfect. Never have I claimed to be. But I am not a liar.  
You have helped to clear some of the confusion and you know their situation better. But I will try to help where I can to reduce this animosity and try to create a more perfect union.

#317
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
“What the Resurrection Is:

It is a ancient ritual ceremony of 'rebirth ' into a following or sect.

Nothing more nothing less.


ritual
/ˈrɪtʃʊəl/
Learn to pronounce

noun

  1. a religious or solemn ceremony consisting of a series of actions performed according to a prescribed order.
The same ritual was performed on Lazarus. He was said to have "died" - i.e.lost faith in the movement. 
Topic's author
#318
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
-> @Shila
“What the Resurrection Is:
It is a ancient ritual ceremony of 'rebirth ' into a following or sect.

Nothing more nothing less.


ritual
/ˈrɪtʃʊəl/
Learn to pronounce

noun

  1. a religious or solemn ceremony consisting of a series of actions performed according to a prescribed order.
The same ritual was performed on Lazarus. He was said to have "died" - i.e.lost faith in the movement. 
John 11:43 When he had said this, Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!” 44 The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face.Jesus said to them, “Take off the grave clothes and let him go.”


In the Christian religion, the Resurrection is Jesus Christ's return to life on the third day after his death, or the return of all people to life at the end of the world.

The resurrection of Jesus.

“First, what did it mean for Jesus’s disciples to claim that he had been “raised” from the dead? Second, why is it that so many Jews in the first century AD believed that Jesus really was raised from the dead? According to the Acts of the Apostles, within a couple years after Jesus’s death, some “five thousand” Jews came to believe in his “resurrection” (see “Acts 4:1-4). What was it that convinced them that the tomb of Jesus really was empty on Easter Sunday? How do we explain the historical fact of early Christian belief in the resurrection?
”
“What the Resurrection Is
What then does the resurrection mean? Let’s turn to the Gospel accounts and look at three points that are essential for understanding what the disciples were actually claiming when they said that Jesus had been “raised from the dead.”
“First, the resurrected Jesus has a body. He is not a ghost. This is perhaps clearest in Luke’s account of Jesus’s appearance to the disciples in the Upper Room:
As they were saying this, Jesus himself stood among them, and said to them, “Peace to you.” But they were startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit. And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have.” And when he had said this he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they still disbelieved for joy, and wondered, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate before them. (Luke 24:36-43)”

“Note well that the disciples’ first reaction is to assume that Jesus is a “spirit” (Greek pneuma). This shows us, for one thing, that they believed in ghosts! It also shows us that they were familiar with the idea of encountering the disembodied “spirit” of a dead person. In order to correct this misunderstanding, Jesus insists that he has “flesh and bones”—that is, that he has a real human body. And just in case the disciples have any doubts about the reality of his body, he asks them for something to eat! Although spirits might be able to do lots of things, because they lack bodies, sitting down to a nice meal of broiled fish is not one of them. There are few things more bodily than the act of eating.”

“Second, the resurrected Jesus has the same body that he had while he was alive. That’s why he still bears the wounds of the cross.13 Jesus implies as much when he shows his disciples “his hands and his feet” (Luke 24:40). The Gospel of John’s account of Jesus’s appearance to Thomas makes this explicit:
Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe.” Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but 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; do not be faithless, but believing.” “Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.” (John 20:24-29)
As this account makes very clear, the risen Jesus has not discarded his human body like an old garment. The crucifixion has literally left its marks on him, forever, but without conquering his life. Moreover, notice also that when Thomas is confronted with the reality of the resurrection, his response is an unequivocal affirmation of Jesus’s divinity: “My Lord and my God! (Greek ho kyrios mou kai ho theos mou)” (John 20:28).14 For Thomas, the resurrection of Jesus after his death vindicates the claims that Jesus made about his divinity during his life.”

#319
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
In the Christian religion, the Resurrection is Jesus Christ's return to life on the third day after his death,

Yes. I am sure all the indoctrinated from birth Christians believe that pathetic drivel.  But it nothing more than an initiation ritual.
Topic's author
#320
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
--> @Shila
In the Christian religion, the Resurrection is Jesus Christ's return to life on the third day after his death,

Yes. I am sure all the indoctrinated from birth Christians believe that pathetic drivel.  But it nothing more than an initiation ritual.
If resurrection was just an initiation ritual, why is it unique to Christianity ?

“What the Resurrection Is.

What then does the resurrection mean? Let’s turn to the Gospel accounts and look at three points that are essential for understanding what the disciples were actually claiming when they said that Jesus had been “raised from the dead.”
“First, the resurrected Jesus has a body. He is not a ghost. This is perhaps clearest in Luke’s account of Jesus’s appearance to the disciples in the Upper Room:
As they were saying this, Jesus himself stood among them, and said to them, “Peace to you.” But they were startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit. And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have.” And when he had said this he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they still disbelieved for joy, and wondered, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate before them. (Luke 24:36-43)”

“Note well that the disciples’ first reaction is to assume that Jesus is a “spirit” (Greek pneuma). This shows us, for one thing, that they believed in ghosts! It also shows us that they were familiar with the idea of encountering the disembodied “spirit” of a dead person. In order to correct this misunderstanding, Jesus insists that he has “flesh and bones”—that is, that he has a real human body. And just in case the disciples have any doubts about the reality of his body, he asks them for something to eat! Although spirits might be able to do lots of things, because they lack bodies, sitting down to a nice meal of broiled fish is not one of them. There are few things more bodily than the act of eating.”

“Second, the resurrected Jesus has the same body that he had while he was alive. That’s why he still bears the wounds of the cross.13 Jesus implies as much when he shows his disciples “his hands and his feet” (Luke 24:40). The Gospel of John’s account of Jesus’s appearance to Thomas makes this explicit:
Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe.” Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but 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; do not be faithless, but believing.” “Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.” (John 20:24-29)
As this account makes very clear, the risen Jesus has not discarded his human body like an old garment. The crucifixion has literally left its marks on him, forever, but without conquering his life. Moreover, notice also that when Thomas is confronted with the reality of the resurrection, his response is an unequivocal affirmation of Jesus’s divinity: “My Lord and my God! (Greek ho kyrios mou kai ho theos mou)” (John 20:28).14 For Thomas, the resurrection of Jesus after his death vindicates the claims that Jesus made about his divinity during his life.”

#321
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
--> @Shila
In the Christian religion, the Resurrection is Jesus Christ's return to life on the third day after his death,

Yes. I am sure all the indoctrinated from birth Christians believe that pathetic drivel.  But it nothing more than an initiation ritual.
If resurrection was just an initiation ritual, why is it unique to Christianity ?

Why do you not research the subject instead of simply regurgitating what you have been brainwashed into regurgitating?

Not a single person witnessed a three-day old rotten stinking corpse rise from a stone-cold slab.

Topic's author
#322
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
--> @Shila
--> @Shila
In the Christian religion, the Resurrection is Jesus Christ's return to life on the third day after his death,

Yes. I am sure all the indoctrinated from birth Christians believe that pathetic drivel.  But it nothing more than an initiation ritual.
If resurrection was just an initiation ritual, why is it unique to Christianity ?

Why do you not research the subject instead of simply regurgitating what you have been brainwashed into regurgitating?

Not a single person witnessed a three-day old rotten stinking corpse rise from a stone-cold slab.
You should read and think more before posting.

“These passages below demolish any argument that the first Christians—whether Jew or Gentile—believed in the resurrection of Jesus because they were particularly gullible. Once again, ancient people knew full well that ordinarily dead people stay dead.17 So if the fact of the resurrection was such a hard pill for so many people to swallow, why then did the disciples come to believe it? The Gospels describe three major reasons they believed.
First, the disciples came to believe in the resurrection of Jesus because of the empty tomb.18 As Bart Ehrman writes: “All of our sources agree that Jesus was dead and buried, and that on the third day his tomb was empty.”19 Ehrman is entirely correct. All four of the first-century Gospels tell us that on the Sunday of Passover week, the tomb in which Joseph of Arimathea had laid Jesus’s body was empty (see Matthew 28:1-8; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:1-10). Perhaps the most striking eyewitness account of the discovery of the empty tomb is from the Gospel of John:

“Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. So she ran, and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” Peter then came out with the other disciple, and they went toward the tomb. They both ran, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first; and stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; he saw the linen cloths lying, and the napkin, which had been on his head, not lying with the linen cloths but rolled up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; for as yet they did not know the scripture, that he must rise from the dead. Then the disciples went back to their homes.(John 20:1-10)

The reason people came to believe in the resurrection is because of the appearances of the risen Jesus to those who knew him. Significantly, there are so many accounts of Jesus’s appearances to his disciples that we do not have the space to even quote them all here, much less discuss them.24 Instead, I’ll just summarize the evidence in the form of a list.

The Appearances of the Resurrected Jesus

1. Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene
(Matthew 28:1-10; John 20:14-18)
2. Jesus appears to several female disciples
(Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11)
3. Jesus appears to Simon Peter
(Luke 24:34; 1 Corinthians 15:5; John 21:1-24)
4. Jesus appears to James, John, Thomas, Nathanael, and two others
(John 21:1-24)
5. Jesus appears to the eleven disciples as a group
(Matthew 28:16-20; John 20:19-29)
6. Jesus appears to Cleopas and one unnamed disciple
(Luke 24:13-35)
7. Jesus appears to more than five hundred “brothers” at once
(1 Corinthians 15:6)
8. Jesus appears to James (a.k.a. “the Lord’s brother”)
(1 Corinthians 15:7; compare Galatians 2:19)
“9. Jesus appears to Saul of Tarsus (a.k.a. Paul)
(1 Corinthians 15:8)”





#323
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @Shila
--> @Shila
In the Christian religion, the Resurrection is Jesus Christ's return to life on the third day after his death,

Yes. I am sure all the indoctrinated from birth Christians believe that pathetic drivel.  But it nothing more than an initiation ritual.
If resurrection was just an initiation ritual, why is it unique to Christianity ?

Why do you not research the subject instead of simply regurgitating what you have been brainwashed into regurgitating?

Not a single person witnessed a three-day old rotten stinking corpse rise from a stone-cold slab.
You should read and think more before posting.

An empty tomb is only evidence that a tomb was found to be empty. Nothing you have produced proves anything at all.

Sorry to burst your bubble but resurrection is nothing more than an initiation ritual into one sect or another.
#324
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
If resurrection was just an initiation ritual, why is it unique to Christianity ?
in what sense is resurrection unique to Christianity?
Topic's author
#325
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
An empty tomb is only evidence that a tomb was found to be empty. Nothing you have produced proves anything at all.

Sorry to burst your bubble but resurrection is nothing more than an initiation ritual into one sect or another.
Again read what is being posted. There were eyewitness accounts testifying to the appearances of the risen Jesus to those who knew him.

The reason people came to believe in the resurrection is because of the appearances of the risen Jesus to those who knew him. Significantly, there are so many accounts of Jesus’s appearances to his disciples that we do not have the space to even quote them all here, much less discuss them.24 Instead, I’ll just summarize the evidence in the form of a list.

The Appearances of the Resurrected Jesus

1. Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene
(Matthew 28:1-10; John 20:14-18)
2. Jesus appears to several female disciples
(Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-11)
3. Jesus appears to Simon Peter
(Luke 24:34; 1 Corinthians 15:5; John 21:1-24)
4. Jesus appears to James, John, Thomas, Nathanael, and two others
(John 21:1-24)
5. Jesus appears to the eleven disciples as a group
(Matthew 28:16-20; John 20:19-29)
6. Jesus appears to Cleopas and one unnamed disciple
(Luke 24:13-35)
7. Jesus appears to more than five hundred “brothers” at once
(1 Corinthians 15:6)
8. Jesus appears to James (a.k.a. “the Lord’s brother”)
(1 Corinthians 15:7; compare Galatians 2:19)
“9. Jesus appears to Saul of Tarsus (a.k.a. Paul)
(1 Corinthians 15:8)”

#326
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Stephen
@Tradesecret
@Shila


Stephen,

Regarding my revealing post that Jesus DID NOT DIE, as shown herewith in this link: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8091/post-links/353291  , DEBATEART Religion Forum must have a sign out once again somewhere that states "All Bible stupid pseudo-christians welcome!" Therefore, as shown, Shila, and the ever so Bible inept Miss Tradesecret, have taken advantage of this welcoming sign and are now making continued Bible fools of themselves!

As I have said before, Bible stupid pseudo-christians do not know they are Bible stupid, because of the simple fact that they are so Bible stupid®️


.
#327
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
An empty tomb is only evidence that a tomb was found to be empty. Nothing you have produced proves anything at all.

Sorry to burst your bubble but resurrection is nothing more than an initiation ritual into one sect or another.
Again read what is being posted. There were eyewitness accounts testifying to the appearances of the risen Jesus to those who knew him.

Yep. I read that.  It states nothing about a single one of them witnessing stinking and rotting a three-day old corpse rising from a cold stone slab.
 And it is debateable whether Jesus was even dead when they took him down from the cross. He could have been unconscious or in a coma.  You need to look at what was given to him while he was hanging there losing his faith in his "father".  

 

#328
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Stephen
@Tradesecret
@Shila


.
Shila, the Copy and Paste Artist, the dumbfounded Bible fool, and the runaway from Bible facts about our Historical Jesus,

Barring your outright Bible stupidity that Jesus DID NOT DIE as I have shown you in this link: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8091/post-links/353291   why do you continue to run away in discussion like Miss Tradesecret does when I present biblical axioms to the two of you?  As explicitly shown below, the “Historical Jesus,” which is the topic of your ungodly thread in not following 1 Timothy 2:11-14, had the biblical attributes listed below, bar none!

Those attributes that you sheepishly RUN AWAY from about our Jesus as being Yahweh God incarnate are as follows: Jesus was embarrassingly, greedy, jealous, selfish, self-centered, petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capricious, and malevolent.

Shila, remember bible stupid fool, your thread is about the "historical Jesus," therefore,  the aforementioned attributes about Jesus are all in context with your pitiful and embarrassing thread!  Get it?

Shila, are you that SCARED in front of the membership to discuss the real Historical Jesus as shown above?  Huh?  Or, are you going to run like Miss Tradesecret does and HIDE from your own thread?  LOL!


.


#329
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
Shila, are you that SCARED in front of the membership to discuss the real Historical Jesus as shown above? 

The thing here Brother D. is that Shila is of the impression that because no one on this thread has actually argued against there ever being an historical Jesus, he has jumped to the conclusion that he somehow proven that an historical Jesus actually existed. Which of course he hasn't proven any such thing. 


Topic's author
#330
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
Stephen,

Regarding my revealing post that Jesus DID NOT DIE, as shown herewith in this link: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8091/post-links/353291  , DEBATEART Religion Forum must have a sign out once again somewhere that states "All Bible stupid pseudo-christians welcome!" Therefore, as shown, Shila, and the ever so Bible inept Miss Tradesecret, have taken advantage of this welcoming sign and are now making continued Bible fools of themselves!

As I have said before, Bible stupid pseudo-christians do not know they are Bible stupid, because of the simple fact that they are so Bible stupid®️

Shila posted:  "Having established the case for the Historical Jesus. The question on everyone’s mind has to be why and how did the Historical Jesus die?"


JESUS DIDN'T DIE BIBLE FOOL SHILA!

DIE: to cease to live; undergo the complete and permanent cessation of all vital functions; become dead.
Listen up Bible fool Shila, Jesus DID NOT remain dead, because He came back after a 3 day tomb nap and walked out as being flesh and blood, understood Bible fool, huh?  In the real primitive bible sacrifices the individual or animal remained DEAD, which is a true meaningful sacrifice!  Deduced, since our Jesus did not remain dead, he therefore did not die by remaining dead as the definition in how one dies shown above! 
Here you admit Jesus died. 
So Jesus did indeed die. Jesus was crucified and the Gospels record his last breath.

Luke 23:46 Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” When he had said this, he breathed his last.

Mark 15:37 With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last.

Matthew 27:50 And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

 A factual and real sacrifice is that you remain DEAD, period, where one does NOT come back to life three days later!  HELLO?!  As an example, a true sacrifice  is when USA  soldiers remained dead after they gave their lives to protect the United States of America in WW2!

You are talking about the resurrection of Jesus. One has to die before they can be resurrected. Jesus died and was resurrected. This is very unique to Christianity.

SHILA the continued Bible fool, the question on everyone’s mind has to be when are you going to TRUTHFULLY show that our Jesus we worship, as the Serial Killer Yahweh God incarnate, was embarrassingly, greedy, jealous, selfish, self-centered, petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capricious, and malevolent!
We now know the Jesus you worship is very different from the Jesus Christians worship.

Here is how you described the Jesus you worship BrotherD.:

BrotherD wrote: “our Jesus we worship, as the Serial Killer Yahweh God incarnate, was embarrassingly, greedy, jealous, selfish, self-centered, petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capricious, and malevolent!

Why are you blaspheming Jesus, BrotherD.?