"...the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is but a saying from their mouth; they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them; how they are deluded away from the Truth! They take their priests and their monks to be their lords in derogation of God, and they take as their Lord Christ the son of Mary. Yet they were commanded to worship but One God: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to God! Far is He from having the partners they associate with Him."
"In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
Say: He is God, the One and Only,
God, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begets not, nor is He begotten,
And there is none like Him."
I guess if you are a Canaanite Jew you consider the that one you are calling God is in need of some kind of payment via earthly things to recompense for sin. The prophets and Jesus taught that God desired mercy not sacrifice. You see all of the earthly libations that you could offer already belong to Him, but mercy is yours to give. Being an atheist, you lack understanding of the scriptures. Jesus said that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. If you study His word you will then come to a new understanding of the prophets you are quoting. Jeremiah is speaking to a people of captivity. (Babylonian captivity) The prophet Isaiah wrote:
The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon Me,
Because the LORD has anointed Me
To preach good tidings to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the CAPTIVES,
And the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
Here you find the basics of the term "Gospel"
I'm trying to find point you are responding to in my article. I have no idea. The closest thing I can think of is you take issue with the Jeremiah 31:33-34 quote that describes the New Covenant. Jeremiah may have been speaking to a people of captivity (although to make your point you go on to quote Isaiah...??), but he clearly describes a New Covenant that has not obtained. Specifically, people are still saying, "know the lord" to each other.
"...No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other, ‘Know the Lord’, for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more.”
In the salutation of the first epistle of Peter you find these words:
She who is in Babylon, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son.
You will of course note that there was no early Christian congregation @ Babylon.
For an atheist there sure is a lot of theology going on here. Are you sure about your position? It is interesting how Jesus after two thousand years can cause us to sort ourselves.In the salutation of the first epistle of Peter you find these words:
For an atheist there sure is a lot of theology going on here. Are you sure about your position? It is interesting how Jesus after two thousand years can cause us to sort ourselves.
you write: "Being an atheist, you lack understanding of the scriptures." AND "In the salutation of the first epistle of Peter...."
First of all, it's in the closing of 1 Peter 5:12-13, not the salutation. Perhaps my lack of understanding is holding me back here?
Second, let's grant that the words exist, and that there was no congregation at Babylon. What's your point?
Third, Jesus has never once caused me to sort myself.
Fourth, if you're curious about why I engage in religious debates, check out the length essay I wrote titled, "Why I engage in religious debates".
In response to Ayse:
It is interesting that your prophet did not call Jesus son of Joseph? There is a big difference in the speech of Jesus and Muhammad. One say choose, one says submit. One says the wheat and the tares must grow together, the other says remove the infidel. And you are right many Christians do imitate unbelievers. Following the father of lies rather than a Father who is full of mercy and grace.
Jesus of Nazareth spoke like no other. Actually other worldly. Who had heard of such things as; "love your enemy, bless those who curse you, Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven."
These were hard sayings then and they still are.
I'm glad you are there!
You find the method in which Jesus was sacrificed unexceptable according to the terms of animal sacrifice in Leviticus. Who says He was an animal? Often He is referred to as the "Lamb of God" sometimes "Lion of Judah" and other times, the true bread from heaven, rose of sharon, "Prince of Peace", Immanuel. If the sacrificial rites in Lexiticus were all that was required to please God they would still be in place. It would be sin as you will, just bring the payment. Does that make sense to you?
And why do you constrain Christians in Judaism? I don't offer beasts to God I offer myself.
please excuse the error in salutation.
Jesus came to receive a kingdom.
you write: I'm trying to find
Jeremiah is writing to the "House of Israel" and the "House of Judah" not Christians and not the population in general. Do you see Judaism changed by the advent? You see it changed by the lack of the temple. So why do you say that this new covenant is late? God is eternal, this covenant is not a business agreement it is a matter of kinship unlike the previous one. Atonement is not the same as forgiveness, "says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity." Is God late or is Judaism? Is something absent from God or from us? Read the prophet and see why the exile took place. Selah
Ok, let's zoom in on this one verse: "...No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other, ‘Know the Lord’, for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more.”
Who is "they"? Whoever you say this group is they have to 1. not teach one another. 2. not say "know the Lord".
If no group meets this criteria, then the New Covenant has not come about.
Hi Converse,__ The New Covenant has not come about to the House of Israel and House of Judah. Jesus is the mediator of the New Covenant and the Jews rejected Him. A covenant may have conditions and prerequisites that qualify the undertaking, including the actions of second or third parties, but there is no inherent agreement by such other parties to fulfill those requirements. Desiples of Christ may consider themselves ministers of this covenant based on the language in 2 Corinthians.
2 Corinthians 3:6
who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
The covenant also applies to a Kingdom...Remember Jesus came to receive a Kingdom?
In that He says, “A new covenant, ” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
Notice the language..becoming obsolete..growing old..ready to vanish away..
I wonder why you call upon and refernce the words in the Old Testament to examine and criticise a figure of hope. Someone who believes in, well, any divine being, need not rely upon a string of words. The Old Testament promises that the Son of God/Son of Man will come into this world and save it. You question whether the act of sacrifice did save the world. You have questioned whether Jesus was the Son of God and thus the Messiah promised. But i ask you, why do i, or anyone for that matter, need proof to justify my beliefs? They are indifferent to you. What i think is morally right and wrong will differ to the next person...
I believe that my soul is eternal. I believe it is eternal because Jesus died for it to be so. Knowing the contradictions within the Bible has not tainted my faith, i do not believe less. I know of many spiritual pathways, i chose Christianity because it gave me something more than what you have examined in your essay. I gives me hope. After all, if i do not have hope, why would i continue living?
Re:"Knowing the contradictions within the Bible has not tainted my faith, i do not believe less. I know of many spiritual pathways, i chose Christianity because it gave me something more than what you have examined in your essay. I gives me hope."
It is truly rare that a person is as honest as you are. When you say that you believe in things with contradictions because they give you hope, and not because they are true, you have made quite an admission.
If you do not value truth and you admit it, very well. I'm not interested in talking with a person who does not care if she is deluded. There is no point having a rational discussion with you at all. I'm interested in talking with people who actually hope that their beliefs describe reality -- and would want to know if they are committing their life to a demonstrably false idea.
that 's why it's called the New Testament. God did away with all of the old requirements, the Old Testament things and made a way that would please God and would be a way for man to be able to get rid of his sins. i don't expect you to believe any of this because you are an atheist and you already have you mind made up, but i'll tell you like one of my old preachers told an atheist at mcdonald's one day, if you are right i will have nothing to worry about, but if i'm right you'll have everything to worry about.
if you didn't believe in God so much you wouldn't be so worried what other people believe. you just believe that God doesn't exist, but you do believe in God. All that matters is what you have done with His Son, Jesus the Christ.
the more and more science learns, the more that it proves God's existence, they just don't want to admit it either. although there are some Christian scientists that do admit it.
God so loved you that if only YOU would believe in His Son that YOU could have everlasting life.
all YOU have to do is to believe in the Death, Burial and Resurrection of my Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ, and to believe that He was the Son of God.
there are no contradictions within the Bible. they are accounts from 4 different witnesses to the same event. in a court of law 2day, if all of the witnesses get up and tell the same story verbatim, that would through doubt on all of their testimony, that they might have all been collaborating on their stories, but each one might have been standing at a different angle or something a little different in what they actually saw, but they all saw the same thing. one of the Gospel writers was a lawyer, one was a doctor and one was a tax collector and i don't remember what the other one was, but God wanted the Gospel written from 4 different objectives to give a truer, better account of what happened.
the scientist have discovered that the universe is neither expanding or contracting, it is just as God made it all of those years ago. there is no evolution, the changes are mere mutations. they can't find all of the transition fossils because there aren't any.
Originally Posted By tommy leethere are no contradictions within the Bible. they are accounts from 4 different witnesses to the same event. in a court of law 2day, if all of the witnesses get up and tell the same story verbatim, that would through doubt on all of their testimony, that they might have all been collaborating on their stories, but each one might have been standing at a different angle or something a little different in what they actually saw, but they all saw the same thing. one of the Gospel writers was a lawyer, one was a doctor and one was a tax collector and i don't remember what the other one was, but God wanted the Gospel written from 4 different objectives to give a truer, better account of what happened.
The problem with this "contradictions prove no collaboration" argument is that if it can be applied to the Gospel accounts, it can be applied just as easily to the testimony of the witnesses at Jesus' trial:"Many people did tell lies against Jesus, but they did not agree on what they said." (Mark 14:56). If the testimony of those witnesses should be rejected because it didn't agree, we can't let the Gospel writers themselves off the hook when they have the same problem.
Lies are not different projections of the same essential truth. They are easily discernible in the Holy Spirit.
That evidence will not, of course, be admissible in a court of law. However, God tells us to walk by faith and not by sight. Yet again, it's a case of walking with faith in God, based on the evidence of his word in the Bible and of our and every other Christian's everyday experience with the Holy Spirit. I don't think God wishes to be "proved" so that people believe. Even when Jesus was here bodily, there were masses of people who didn't believe the miracles. Jesus was here physically to give us signs so that those who will hear will hear. Those who won't, won't.