What Jesus really looked like

Page 5 of 7 [ 101 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 682
Location: usa

25 Sep 2008, 4:44 pm

4004 B.C.

* God created this world. Adam and Eve were His finishing touch. Gen.1
* The seven-day weekly cycle was established. Gen. 2:2
* The seventh-day Sabbath (rest) was instated. Gen. 2:1-3
* Evil entered this world. Gen. 3
* A deliverer was promised. Gen. 3:15
* Adam and Eve's first two children, Cain and Abel, were born. Gen. 4:1-2
* The first murder was committed. Cain killed Abel and then moved to the eastern land of Nod. Gen. 4:3-16

3900 B.C.

* Cain's first child, Enoch, was born

lets look at this care fully we had adam and eve, they had 2 kids cain and abel, both boys, able dies. how did cain have his first child.

_________________
Kill a man and you?re a murderer. Kill many and you?re a hero. Kill them all you?re favored by the gods. ?or dangerously unbalanced-

Fidget
Supporting Member

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 919
Location: Illinois, US

25 Sep 2008, 4:48 pm

Cultus_Diabolus wrote:

4004 B.C.

* God created this world. Adam and Eve were His finishing touch. Gen.1
* The seven-day weekly cycle was established. Gen. 2:2
* The seventh-day Sabbath (rest) was instated. Gen. 2:1-3
* Evil entered this world. Gen. 3
* A deliverer was promised. Gen. 3:15
* Adam and Eve's first two children, Cain and Abel, were born. Gen. 4:1-2
* The first murder was committed. Cain killed Abel and then moved to the eastern land of Nod. Gen. 4:3-16

3900 B.C.

* Cain's first child, Enoch, was born

lets look at this care fully we had adam and eve, they had 2 kids cain and able, both boys, able dies. how did cain has his first child.

Christians correct me if I'm wrong, but I've met some Christians who don't think everything in the Adam and Eve story is literal. I know Christians who believe it's supposed to be symbolic, but not all of the events are word for word what happened. Now, here's an even more interesting thought: did Adam and Eve have bellybuttons? :scratch:

Cultus_Diabolus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 682
Location: usa

25 Sep 2008, 4:51 pm

Fidget wrote:

Cultus_Diabolus wrote:

4004 B.C.

* God created this world. Adam and Eve were His finishing touch. Gen.1
* The seven-day weekly cycle was established. Gen. 2:2
* The seventh-day Sabbath (rest) was instated. Gen. 2:1-3
* Evil entered this world. Gen. 3
* A deliverer was promised. Gen. 3:15
* Adam and Eve's first two children, Cain and Abel, were born. Gen. 4:1-2
* The first murder was committed. Cain killed Abel and then moved to the eastern land of Nod. Gen. 4:3-16

3900 B.C.

* Cain's first child, Enoch, was born

lets look at this care fully we had adam and eve, they had 2 kids cain and able, both boys, able dies. how did cain has his first child.

saying one story in the bible isn't historically accurate makes the hole authenticity of the bible in question, eather a historical book of gods word. or a story book made by man.

_________________
Kill a man and you?re a murderer. Kill many and you?re a hero. Kill them all you?re favored by the gods. ?or dangerously unbalanced-

Fidget
Supporting Member

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 919
Location: Illinois, US

25 Sep 2008, 4:55 pm

Cultus_Diabolus wrote:

Fidget wrote:

Cultus_Diabolus wrote:

4004 B.C.

* God created this world. Adam and Eve were His finishing touch. Gen.1
* The seven-day weekly cycle was established. Gen. 2:2
* The seventh-day Sabbath (rest) was instated. Gen. 2:1-3
* Evil entered this world. Gen. 3
* A deliverer was promised. Gen. 3:15
* Adam and Eve's first two children, Cain and Abel, were born. Gen. 4:1-2
* The first murder was committed. Cain killed Abel and then moved to the eastern land of Nod. Gen. 4:3-16

3900 B.C.

* Cain's first child, Enoch, was born

lets look at this care fully we had adam and eve, they had 2 kids cain and able, both boys, able dies. how did cain has his first child.

saying one story in the bible isn't historically accurate makes the hole authenticity of the bible in question, eather a historical book of gods word. or a story book made by man.

I pretty much agree, but eh not my words. :shrug:

philosopherBoi
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,255

25 Sep 2008, 5:43 pm

I don't care what he looked like, I actually get annoyed with all the pictures of what people thing Christ looked like. We don't know and we wont' till either we die or he comes back.

_________________
When Jesus Christ said love thy neighbor he was not making a suggestion he was stating the law of god.

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

25 Sep 2008, 5:45 pm

Cultus_Diabolus wrote:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qmglGWMsdk[/youtube]

_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson

Accelerator
Sea Gull

Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 236
Location: Netherlands

25 Sep 2008, 5:59 pm

Fidget wrote:

This is true..

The story of Abraham is symbolic.. according to Scripture.. so why not the life of Jesus.. ?

All the stories are obviously symbolism.. allegory.. riddles.. etc.

The miracles.. all have hidden meanings.. that can be discovered by searching the book.. for passages that offer up clues.

In a nut-shell... the bible is an occult book..

There are many verses in the bible that clearly instruct.. not to read literally... this is just one.

Below.. Paul is making an interpretation..

---

"Tell me, you who want to be under law, Do you not hear the Law?

For example, it is written that Abraham aquired two sons, one by the servant girl and one by the free woman; but the one born by the servant girl was actually born in the manner of the flesh, the other by the free woman through a promise. These things stand for a symbolic drama; for these two women mean two covenants, the one from Mount Si'nai, which brings forth children for slavery, and which is Ha'gar. Now this Ha'gar means Si'nai, a mountain in Arabia, and she corresponds with the world today, for she is in slavery. But the world above is free and she is our mother."

Galatians 4:21

-

Cultus_Diabolus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 682
Location: usa

25 Sep 2008, 6:37 pm

skafather84 wrote:

Cultus_Diabolus wrote:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qmglGWMsdk[/youtube]

have alot of his stand ups on cd, funny man, to bad he died. from cancer no less, not lung cancer thou

_________________
Kill a man and you?re a murderer. Kill many and you?re a hero. Kill them all you?re favored by the gods. ?or dangerously unbalanced-

Cultus_Diabolus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 682
Location: usa

25 Sep 2008, 7:07 pm

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCf2fJsBxRc&feature=related[/youtube]

"its not a war on drugs its a war on personal freedom." bill hicks

_________________
Kill a man and you?re a murderer. Kill many and you?re a hero. Kill them all you?re favored by the gods. ?or dangerously unbalanced-

ShadesOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,983
Location: California

25 Sep 2008, 10:44 pm

I like the first version a lot better then the glorified version we usually see.

Cultus_Diabolus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 682
Location: usa

25 Sep 2008, 10:46 pm

ShadesOfMe wrote:

I like the first version a lot better then the glorified version we usually see.

what are you talking about

_________________
Kill a man and you?re a murderer. Kill many and you?re a hero. Kill them all you?re favored by the gods. ?or dangerously unbalanced-

Fidget
Supporting Member

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 919
Location: Illinois, US

26 Sep 2008, 12:03 am

Cultus_Diabolus wrote:

ShadesOfMe wrote:

I like the first version a lot better then the glorified version we usually see.

what are you talking about

I think she means the pictures of Jesus. What the thread was originally about. :p

Cultus_Diabolus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 682
Location: usa

26 Sep 2008, 12:04 am

Fidget wrote:

Cultus_Diabolus wrote:

ShadesOfMe wrote:

I like the first version a lot better then the glorified version we usually see.

what are you talking about

I think she means the pictures of Jesus. What the thread was originally about. :p

oh ya this thread was about a picture of Jesus.

_________________
Kill a man and you?re a murderer. Kill many and you?re a hero. Kill them all you?re favored by the gods. ?or dangerously unbalanced-

n4mwd
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Jun 2008
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 871
Location: Palm Beach, FL

28 Sep 2008, 5:47 am

ouinon wrote:

Noone? Are you sure of that?

.

No one except agnostics and of course people who have never heard of Jesus and don't now anything.

Since there IS hard evidence in the form of historical writings, some even pre-date the new testament, that Jesus DID walk the Earth, his existence at AD 0001 is not a hard sell to atheists. What atheists don't accept is that Jesus was a deity.

Again, agnostics ("agnostic" comes from the word "ignorant") don't need or accept scientific proof. They believe what they want to and tend to go whatever way is 'popular' at the time.

I also need to point out that all three major world religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) all maintain that Jesus or Nazareth did exist on Earth at AD 0001. However, they all disagree as to what His purpose for being here was and who His Father was. According to one source I googled, those three religions alone account for about 55% of the world. Non-religious people account for about 14% (includes both atheist and agnostic).

ouinon
Supporting Member

Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,939
Location: Europe

28 Sep 2008, 6:14 am

n4mwd wrote:

There IS hard evidence in the form of historical writings. Some even pre-date the new testament, that Jesus DID walk the Earth.

Please provide links and/or quotes/refs to support this assertion, ( as I did on previous pages ). I think that you will find that all sources are either apocryphal or based on/postdate the earliest Gospels, or consist of records of the hanging of one person with the relatively common name of Jesus at that period.

The Jewish writings about Jesus ( which also post-date the Gospels) were no more based on historical records than the Gospels or later roman references were, and were more in the nature of a satire of a religious myth, ( a counter-attack, which did nothing to reduce the power of this new myth, may in fact have contributed to its spread ), in the same category of literature as Gibbon's "Cold Comfort Farm" is a ( light )satire of D.H. Lawrence's writing.

Quote:

What atheists don't accept is that Jesus was a deity.

Taking the bible literally, and selectively at that, is not confined to Christians!

.

Phagocyte
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,757

28 Sep 2008, 8:27 am

n4mwd wrote:

Again, agnostics ("agnostic" comes from the word "ignorant") don't need or accept scientific proof. They believe what they want to and tend to go whatever way is 'popular' at the time.

No. It actually means "unknown" or "unknowable," from the Greek "gnostos" which means knowledge and the prefix "a" which means without.

The rest of your definition is equally..wrong.

Merriam-Webster wrote:

1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable ; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2: a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>

_________________
Un-ban Chever! Viva La Revolucion!

Page 5 of 7 [ 101 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Jump to:

What Jesus really looked like Post Reply New Topic

What Jesus really looked like