Let's compare Jesus and Muhammed (and debate homosexuality) (and Tombstone).

#1,201
#1,201
DinkinFlicka said:
Good god... ummm...

So, if you were a parent, you wouldn't raise your child to embrace tolerance... or least to be accepting of themselves? Homosexuality is a priori. It's not an acquired trait that needs to be incubated at a young age.

My parents don't smoke pot, but when they found out I was at age 16, they let it go as long as my grades were satisfactory and I didn't partake in anything else. I guess they knew alcohol, cigarettes, and hard drugs were worse for you and took the logical, open-minded approach. Now, if they don't smoke, how does one explain their acceptance of it? Was it love and logic, or was it all a lie?
Click to expand...

Wow!
 
#1,202
#1,202
rjd970 said:
The whole Bible is riddled with question marks if you ask me.

The famous "he who has not sinned shall cast the first stone" story is one. At the end, according to most interpretations, it was just him and the prostitute talking. If that is the case, who hell really knows what was said, and who is narrating the story?
Click to expand...

It was the only time that it is said that Jesus ever
wrote anything Himself. Wonder if anyone copied
that down for posterity?

Have you (or anyone) read; "He Walked the Americas"?




ridethelightening said:
Wow!
Click to expand...

Maui Wowie!! :)
(Explains a lot about his confused state of mind, huh?)
 
#1,203
#1,203
VOLatile said:
You can do better. Jesus was the self-proclaimed "Son of God." Mohammed simply ascended into heaven on flaming horse or something. Both are just as believable.
Click to expand...

In Christianity, according to Jesus, that is your
own choice, to blelieve or not believe.

Not so in islam, you can believe or die, or the
third choice, pay an exorbitant infidel tax that
effectively renders you a slave economically.

But it's all the same to you. :no:
 
#1,204
#1,204
therealUT said:
All of this still amounts to the fact that there is not an eyewitness account of the either the life of Jesus or his Resurrection.

GSVol might take that into account the next time he is selecting which verbiage to use in his posts.
Click to expand...

The Book of James author was James, half brother of Jesus.

The book of Jude author was Jude, half brother of Jesus.

The book of Matthew author was Matthew, apostle of Jesus.

The books of John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, and Revelation author was John, apostle of Jesus.

The Books of 1 Peter and 2 Peter author was Peter, apostle of Jesus.

All of these authors knew Jesus personally and were eyewitness to what they wrote.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
#1,206
#1,206
TennFan said:
There isn't much of a comparison! Jesus reigns and He is a risen savior! What does the other do for us?
Click to expand...

This isn't the Easter thread, so I'm not going to bite my tongue.

There is no more evidence that Jesus is reigning than that Mohammed is up with Alllah via flaming chariot. Furthermore, Jesus has never done anything that I can point to for me. So as far as I am concerned, they share equal position of irrelevance to me.
 
#1,209
#1,209
Gramps said:
The Book of James author was James, half brother of Jesus.

The book of Jude author was Jude, half brother of Jesus.

The book of Matthew author was Matthew, apostle of Jesus.

The books of John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, and Revelation author was John, apostle of Jesus.

The Books of 1 Peter and 2 Peter author was Peter, apostle of Jesus.

All of these authors knew Jesus personally and were eyewitness to what they wrote.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

None of your statements are true according to the Catholic Church.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#1,210
#1,210
Gramps said:
The Book of James author was James, half brother of Jesus.

The book of Jude author was Jude, half brother of Jesus.

The book of Matthew author was Matthew, apostle of Jesus.

The books of John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, and Revelation author was John, apostle of Jesus.

The Books of 1 Peter and 2 Peter author was Peter, apostle of Jesus.

All of these authors knew Jesus personally and were eyewitness to what they wrote.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

This just isn't true, my friend.
 
#1,211
#1,211
IPorange said:
This isn't the Easter thread, so I'm not going to bite my tongue.

There is no more evidence that Jesus is reigning than that Mohammed is up with Alllah via flaming chariot. Furthermore, Jesus has never done anything that I can point to for me. So as far as I am concerned, they share equal position of irrelevance to me.
Click to expand...

Why is it that so many expect to have some kind of benefit from Christ before they will believe? There is no other figure in history who has been more scrutinized and over a greater period of time. Yet the more historical facts we learn, the more the biblical record is confirmed.

Christ is not some genie in a lamp. He is not your personal Santa Clause. He is the Risen Savior, Son of the Living God. Your choice is to believe and follow or not. Either way, the day will come when you will acknowledge His Lordship over creation.
 
#1,217
#1,217
Gramps said:
Do you believe everthing the Catholic Chuch says to be true?
Click to expand...

He has faith that the oldest established Christian church might have some knowledge about the material that they cite in their peer-reviewed publication.

Anyone else find above quote amusing?
 
#1,219
#1,219
Gramps said:
Do you believe everthing the Catholic Chuch says to be true?
Click to expand...

The Catholic Church has a vested interest and incentive in claiming that your statements are correct; yet, the Catholic Church (the institution that fervently defends the Shroud) continues to distance itself from the claims that any of these books and/or letters were written by persons who personally knew Jesus when he was in the flesh. Ergo, I infer that the "science" and "history" behind such claims is even more dubious than that which is behind the claims of the Shroud.

Let me guess, though, you probably think Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, right?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#1,223
#1,223
therealUT said:
The Catholic Church has a vested interest and incentive in claiming that your statements are correct; yet, the Catholic Church (the institution that fervently defends the Shroud) continues to distance itself from the claims that any of these books and/or letters were written by persons who personally knew Jesus when he was in the flesh. Ergo, I infer that the "science" and "history" behind such claims is even more dubious than that which is behind the claims of the Shroud.

Let me guess, though, you probably think Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, right?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

He wrote a good portion of it. There is speculation either way though. To be honest though, as long as I believe it is God breathed, it doesn't necessarily matter who may have helped Moses finish them.
 
#1,224
#1,224
therealUT said:
The Catholic Church has a vested interest and incentive in claiming that your statements are correct; yet, the Catholic Church (the institution that fervently defends the Shroud) continues to distance itself from the claims that any of these books and/or letters were written by persons who personally knew Jesus when he was in the flesh. Ergo, I infer that the "science" and "history" behind such claims is even more dubious than that which is behind the claims of the Shroud.

Let me guess, though, you probably think Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, right?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

You know, there is this thing called "Oral History". Just because someone didnt Tweet Jesus, doesnt mean it never happened
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top