inquisitive01

Just like your seemingly "attempts" here, huh. Is prison stats all we have? What about normal city jail stats? What about all of those not included in your "surveys" (call them that if you wish, LoL) who haven't been caught yet? What about those committing the sins of adultery and lying, which do not involve prison sentences? The list goes on and on, but if wish to argue statistics, go for it... just be sure you have ALL the necessary statistics before drawing your general conclusions, or I'll let you know about it. :thumbs:

Steven Carr

So there is only one God and Jesus was God Incarnate, yet it is only *my* personal view that Christianity teaches that Jesus was God?

Steven Carr

In Christianity, there is a difference between God and Jesus? Christians do not believe that Jesus was God Himself?

Magdlyn

Ah, that is where one gets into the headache called the trinity.

God and Jesus are apparently co-existent and eternal. While J is the Son, he has always existed along with God.

God is the mouth, J is the word. God is the Mind, J is the thought.

They hashed it all out at the Nicene council. Tertullian took a stab at it before then.

Thank God I am a Unitarian.

inquisitive01

If they do, I don't know why. It clearly states in the Bible that Jesus is the Son of God.
I Peter 3:17-22 is one section of the Bible (among quite a few others) that explains who Jesus Christ is.

BlakeEM

many quotes in the bible that prove that jesus is god.
http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ98.HTM


this is proof that jesus isn't god.
http://www.iiie.net/Brochures/Brochure-08.html

Many people seem to believe that jesus is god. It seems it could go both ways... My conclusion... Jesus isn’t god, and Jesus isn’t the son of god.

Angrillori

Well, I'll try again when you answer my questions for the first time....

Ah, I'll continue to be the biger man:

Yes, slavery was not only not discouraged, but it was Encouraged. I think from the start you'll see that's been my position: that an explicit offer of permission counts as encouragement. BUT, moreover, don't think I didn't notice your attempted dodge out of:

1) Demonstrating any point to the contrary, and
2) Showing why we should count the "inspired word of god's" explicit permission to buy, sell, and own, slaves as "not inspired!"

I think the best issue here is as I summed up:

If you were born 500 years ago, would you consider the explicit permission supposedly given by god to own slaves to be inspired and inerrant, the unchanging moral voice of god?
Do you see it so today? (I ask because your previous posts seem to indicate that you see that as a bit added by men to reflect the times they were in.)
If this has changed, how do you know which bits your "self" 500 years in the future will see as inspired?

If what god gives permission to do changes with time, if we had god's permission then, but don't now, then a similar question remains: what will we have permission or NOT have permission to do 500 years from now? AND by what standard does god change what he gives us permission to do?

If you're claiming that god's compositional skills match your own, well ok.
If you're claiming that somehow I'm not understanding what you're saying, perhaps clarification, OR EVEN ANSWERING THE QUESTION, might be in order. ALL you've managed to do so far is raw atention to yet one more attempt to dodge the question.


I was merely attempting to point out to you that BY YOUR OWN standards, I am much more an authority on the bible than you are on subjects you claim to have authoritative wisdom concerning (implicitly).

The main difference being of course, that on Evolution, your critics are offering you evidence, you just refuse to look. Here, concerning the bible, you're not even offering evidence. Hardly a fair state of affairs, wouldn't you agree?

Angrillori

Well, before I was hoping to help you:

You claim we don't believe because we want to sin....

So, rather than wait for you to support your claim, I went looking. Sadly, I wasn't able to help your case. The only statisitics available on religious beliefs + sinful behaviour were prison statistics that showed atheists were LESS prone to that sort of behaviour than Christias.

So, not only do you have NO evidence to support your assertion, you have evidence AGAINST it.

NOW, if you an provide statistics that support your position that atheists do:
lie, comit adultery, etc. more than xians, then go for it. Until you do, your assertion will be more than unfounded, ithe evidence presented will stand AGAINST it.

[unnecessary remarks deleted -V]

inquisitive01

[unnecessary remarks deleted --V]

On behalf of the mods, we ask all posters to refrain from provocative remarks, or this thread may be locked

Vorkosigan

Steven Carr

1 Peter 3
17It is better, if it is God's will, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil. 18For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, 19through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22who has gone into heaven and is at God's right hand--with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.

I can't find anything there which says that Jesus was God.

'He was put to death in the body' is an interesting phrase. How else are people put to death?

If God the Son really was God the Son , and there is but the one God, how can God forsake God the Son?