All our thoughts can be thought of in one of 3 ways. 1 thinking about God 2 thinking about others 3 thinking about self. So in essence we are walking aroung saying to ourselves.. Self self self self self self self self Others others others others others Or God God God God. Most people are probably a combination of 2 and 3 But i challenge people including myself to analyze who they are thinking about the most.
I didn't say it had been CHANGED. I said it had been WRITTEN to include many things that Jesus would not have said just to make him divine. It was written in stages decades after his death. We only have the Gospel writers claim that the Jews said he claimed to be THE Son of God. Any reference to this after relies mainly on the testimony of the Gospels. And these are doubtful. Matthews 'Sermon on the Mount' is apparently verbatim, yet was written by whoever wrote the Gospels some 5-6 decades after the event. Really? We have cases where Jesus was alone - yet we know what was said. His prayer in the Garden is recorded, but no-one except Jesus was there, and it was supposedly between him and his Father. Well, God was the father to every individual Jew according to their scriptures. Each Jew was A son of God. Just as Jesus was. Matthews Nativity story is just as incredulous, and relies on misuse of OT scriptures. Luke's is just the same - only HE ignores all the Jewish and Roman laws of the time.
A very short time by historical standards. There would be no reason to write them down when they happened, while the witnesses were still alive. So what? What makes those writers not truthful, short of a pre-existing any-supernatural bias on your part? And the evidence of their changed lives. SOMETHING happened in the space of eight weeks to change them from a frightened band in hiding (Peter wouldn't even stand up to a servant girl) to a group who the most powerful people in Israel couldn't silence, even by beatings and imprisonment. Being witness to the resurrected Christ is a logical explanation. Yes, really. "It has traditionally been attributed to St. Matthew the Evangelist, one of the 12 Apostles, described in the text as a tax collector (10:3)." Encyclopaedia Britannica. Even if we didn't know who wrote it it wouldn't invalidate the events recorded. The NT was divinely inspired, it would be no big deal for God to convey that prayer to the Gospel writer. That was one of the reasons the Jews gave for killing Jesus, that He claimed to be divine. Don't know what you're talking about, but see Luke 1:1-4. "Based on his accurate description of towns, cities and islands, as well as correctly naming various official titles, archaeologist Sir William Ramsay wrote that "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy... [he] should be placed along with the very greatest of historians."[31] Professor of Classics at Auckland University, E.M. Blaiklock, wrote: "For accuracy of detail, and for evocation of atmosphere, Luke stands, in fact, with Thucydides. The Acts of the Apostles is not shoddy product of pious imagining, but a trustworthy record... it was the spadework of archaeology which first revealed the truth."[32] New Testament scholar Colin Hemer has made a number of advancements in understanding the historical nature and accuracy of Luke's writings." Wikipedia
T These quotes refer to the Acts. In that they are correct - although Paul and Luke had a tendency to be careful not to offend the Romans too much. Luke's knowledge in writing his nativity story is completely wrong. Joseph should have been in Nazareth for the census - Roman Law. It was for the purpose of taxing his Nazareth property. The idea of going to Bethlehem Ephratah because 'he was of the lineage of David' is completely spurious. The idea that he had property there is ridiculous. David was 1000 years in the past. With the history of Bethlehem, the exile etc. it's hardly likely any original families were still there. Before, during and after the exile many Jews fled to other countries, and many stayed in Babylon, having settled down. Those who did return found a completely different situation. Kings were no longer in charge. The Priesthood had taken over. There were kings, but the final power lay with the Priesthood and the High Priest. This was what finally finished Israel as an independent kingdom. 2 brothers fighting for the right to be High Priest. The Romans intervened on behalf of one brother , won, and more or less took over Palestine. Matthew simply misuses OT prophesies to proclaim Jesus birth is prophesied. He uses one verse from Hosea 11 and ignores the context of the chapter. Once you do that anything goes. If Jesus went to Egypt then he also fulfilled the rest of the chapter. He uses Bethlehem Ephratah as Jesus birthplace when the Bible doesn't say that. It says the Messiah will come from Bethlehem - which doesn't mean he was necessarily born there. He uses a lament to promote a massacre, which never happened, and equally has nothing to do with Jesus time. Finally. If you compare the 2 stories carefully in line with the times we have: 1. Jesus in Nazareth and Egypt at the same time. 2. Mary going to Bethlehem when it wasn't necessary 3. We have hundreds of thousands of the descendants of David all converging on Bethlehem at the same time. As this, according to Luke, involved the Roman world that means the world was in uproar as people of all nations made their way to their home towns. 4. In a letter to subjects in the Roman province of Egypt before a census there, the census leader declared that people should remain where they were for the census. You believe what you will and don't dare study the background to the Bible. You might learn things you don't want to know.
Better that Trump who charity donations go to Trump! And while Christians giving to charity does happen the statistics used to prove Christians donate more to charity considers donating to a church as charitable giving.
Charity is charity, liberals are free to give to non-profits like Planned Parenthood and Media Matters and get a tax deduction. They don't, the non-religious give much less than people of faith do, see the book "Who Really Cares". Atheists are all talk and no action. Christians even donate blood more often, and their time.
I suspect I have studied the Bible far more than you have ever done.. I had my first Sunday School lesson during the 2nd World War. Learned, studied and preached for many years. Have you actually studied the Nativity Stories against the background on which they were written. If you had you would agree with me. They are nonsense. . Do you believe the story of Daniel? . 'The language of the book—part of which is Aramaic (2:4–7:2—probably indicates a date of composition later than the Babylonian Exile (6th century BC). Numerous inaccuracies connected with the exilic period (no deportation occurred in 605 BC; Darius was a successor of Cyrus, not a predecessor; etc.) tend to confirm this judgment. Because its religious ideas do not belong to the 6th century BC, numerous scholars date Daniel in the first half of the 2nd century BC and relate the visions to the persecution of the Jews under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164/163 BC). Daniel, extolled for his upright character, is presented as a model for the persecuted community. The unknown author may have drawn inspiration from Ugaritic and Phoenician sources that speak of a legendary figure notable for his righteousness and wisdom'. Brittanica. Just reading the Bible limits your understanding. You think Psalm 22 relates to Jesus? Study the story of David as written in the Bible. It is about the sufferings he went through. Remember that the Hebrews used.picture language. You're missing so much about the REAL BIBLE
But in such a way that he is really thinking me me me me... That's why satanists don't worship Satan. They seek whatever they think is in their self interest
Notice how you ignored my point about church donations count as giving to charity. Drop that out and the giving rates are about equal
Please cite recent research on this issue. Private charity is rife with issues relating to who actually gets a benefit, recognition of needs over time (rather than short term aid to specific disasters noted in the press), etc.
I hear this statement sooooo often. NO-ONE knows this for a fact unless they know the actual amount each individual gives privately to charity. Does anyone know the faith of the person.who quietly slips a donation into a box, or sends a donation to a charity. It's sheer nonsense. To know this you would have to know the financial situation of each individual of a nation, their faith and how much they give openly and privately. Then a poor person may give far more in terms of their own circumstances that a rich man. The widow gave her mite which was worth far more than 50 shekels by a rich man.
Truth is, if man and the men who rule over us would live by the golden rule that God through Christ implored us to do, most of the problems of humanity would be fixed in short order And we would live in a Golden Age that mankind has never seen in our time here on earth. What has kept man from living by such a common sense maxim? It appears to be the power of selfishness and the drive for pleasure and gratification both physical and psychological. A case of base needs being more powerful than the intelligence that took us off planet to explore our solar system. We know how to correct age old horrible problems using simple change in personal behavior. And yet we have willingly refused to do it while still expecting others to treat you the way you want to be treated. Public school once taught the golden rule and its common sense wisdom. And it was drilled into our selfish heads for 12 years. And your parents did it along with your community not only in words but by action as others tried to set an example. But even back then there were not sufficient numbers trying to live by the golden rule. Yet the ones that did made a tremendous difference in the environment. Imo the numbers today that have little to do with the golden rule are at an all time high. I , me, mine. And **** others before they can **** you! Ideological driven partisan party politics and living by that wise maxim from God are like oil and water. The two will not mix naturally .You can have one or the other but not both. And we know how that works out on political forums.
Yep I remember when Jesus was a loving socialist who was concerned about the meek and poor. while reviling the rich and telling us it is easier to do the impossible than it is for the rich to go to heaven. People that hoard wealth a surplus so great as is not needed for personal survival are doing something so horrible that its severity will exclude them from eternal life in paradise . Today God wants you to be that rich man! I guess he needs to fill up hell? Or perhsps these rich preachers of the prosperity gospel are lying to you to get money you cannot afford to give? Joel Osteen comes to mind. You give him money and god pays you back 10 fold , or a thousand fold! You make joel rich and god makes you rich!
never mind, trump's WH spiritual advisor is one of those Prosperity Gospel Charlatans, who according to her, trump came up to her years ago and said "you got it" after hearing one of her con's and they've been "friends and supporters" ever since. Like attracts like in some circles it seems.
You claim "Jesus did not come to server the poor" - followed by "Jesus came to serve everyone" Are the poor not part of the set of "everyone" ? You then blather on about the constitution protection of Guns. What does this have to do with Jesus being transformed by the religious right into a symbol for Guns. It is not some secret that creationists are anti science. Jesus encouraged people to use the brain that God gave them - not hide it away in some cellar sealed with a crucifix. You use the term "limited gov't" in a way not used in the OP. And after all this meaningless and fallacious gibberish - you throw in some snide comment in an attempt to attack the messenger - as if you actually had addressed the message in a coherent way.
No you don't. I'm reminded of a news special I saw decades ago where a woman on welfare was being asked what she was doing to get off it, to which her surprised response was, "I ain't tryna get off it", as if the idea had never crossed her mind. Perhaps it's worth noting that in most ways, she lived better than the kings of Jesus' day.
Jesus regularly used word pictures and stories about self-defense in order to make a broader spiritual point (Lk. 11:21; Mt. 12:29). The biblical narratives ... assume the right of self defense: Lk. 11:21: When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe. Mat 12:29 “Or again, how can anyone enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man? Then he can plunder his house. This is acknowledgement of the right to be secure in one's possessions, right of privacy and self defense ... and right to bear arms.
Dems should admire trump for not being a bible banging fundamentalist Christian. Remember when he tried to quote scripture but botched it? His crowd being Christian forgave him right away while the dems and msm were so ignorant of scripture that they missed his screwup and didnt report it? Haha Trump has no religion. But he like the dems can fake it for votes. The only religion represented in congress is done by one democrat and the religion is Islam.
Yes generally speaking Christians are more decent people than the non Religious . As they should be . They make better neighbors too.Any genuine religion conditions us to be more decent people. Any religion that is to be feared is not a religion but a farce.
