Stephen wrote:there is nothing in the bible that states why a man had to be beaten half to death, nailed to a wooden cross and speared between the ribs. resulting in a mans agonising, torturous cruel death.

DavodAZ wrote:I really wish I could probe the mind of God and get him to answer why he designed the world and life in such a way. As for the way he died, there are a few prophesies of his agony, but why God decided that this was the best way to redeem mankind, beats me. Unless, you have some extra insight.

Indeed , I can only assume the Jesus asked the same.

It doesn't sound at all much like the loving, caring and forgiving god that Christians portray him to be, does it.

And to repeat , god had no trouble telling his mother Mary ( blessed among all women) how great he (Jesus) was gong be, what he would inherit, and about the all peace that he would bring to the earth. Strange then that he kept from her the torturous cruel death or that he son would suffer an agonising death after being betrayed by his own people, isn't it? I mean, he didn't even mention to her that he had sent this child to die in a bloody sacrifice.

I suppose it would have been nice for Mary too, to have some of the "extra insight" that you mention above. I don't think that she would have been so fast to go bounding off to her cousin Elizabeth to tell he the "good news", then, would she?

Bible verses about sacrifice including Jesus.

Hebrews 9:28

Mark 10:45

Ephesians 5:2

Romans 5:8

Psalms 40:6

Romans 12:1

proverbs 21:3

Luke 9:23

Hebrews 13:16

1 John 4:10.

And your point it exactly, what?

[you are]trying your best to mix up words 

Example please.

I didn't ask anyone to die for my crimes or sins or misdemeanours.

By all accounts, and after all the claims made by Christians of humans having “free will” someone did take it upon themselves and committed suicide on my behalf and I didn’t have a say in the matter.

And the idea that I would ask or want anyone to suffer for my crimes or sins is abhorrent and it appals me. Neither my brother nor Jesus is my keeper. And I will suffer and    `bare my own cross, '  as it is I that am responsible for my own actions.  

But who does the bible say is responsible for our crimes/sins?

The bible seems to suggest we alone are responsible. Deuteronomy11:16 “ take heed of yourself”.

And when the omnipotent lord God himself, he having unlimited power, appears to be unable to locate Able asks his brother;

Genesis4; 9  “Where is Abel your brother?”

He said, “I do not know. Am I my brother's keeper?

“Am I my brother's keeper?”

Is this to say that I am not responsible for anyone but myself, my actions and my own behaviour?

 Nowhere will we find a single reference where Jesus admits to his inner circle of coming to specifically do die for their sins. There are a few verses that could be crowbarred into suggesting that he did as much, such as John 3:16, but it will be a struggle to squeeze these words into the mouth of Jesus and sins are not even mentioned, only belief. 

I find it appalling that someone is said to have taken responsibility for something I am alleged to have done and had suffered what the scriptures describe as the most vicious, cruel and sadistic death ever dreamed up by humans, voluntarily!

I find also applauding that someone had taken it upon themselves to actually “sacrifice” themselves without my knowledge or consent! On my behalf.

Wouldn’t they - the believer- also be appalled and find it abhorrent if someone just took it upon themselves to take responsibility for their own sins, crimes and mistakes and sacrificed themselves via an horrific death?

And as an afterthought:

We notice too that god doesn’t address Cain's reply of responsibility but exiles him for his crime of murdering his brother. Cain complains at gen 4:14 that “it will happen that anyone who finds me will kill me.” but it is never explained who will actually kill Cain considering there were only four humans on the planet at the time of the murder and with them now being a man down leavening only three?

The soul or to have a souls simply means to be a living being that thinks , has varying emotions and conscience.

Paul points out the various masquerades the devil uses to fool people.

LOL. Not that old chestnut! You keep forgetting that Paul by his own admission was liar. You also forget the age all this was supposed to have all taken place. It was a time of deep and serious superstition. Paul was a educated man that understood that the illiterate of the time could be fooled with just a few made up ripping yarns. You are not better Paul when it comes making up shite on the hoof.

The only difference was that Paul was preaching to a bunch of ancient thicko's , whereas you, you are trying to use the same ancient yarns on a educated 21st century audience.

The devil chose to disguise as a serpent to approach Eve. Then appeared as Satan to tempt Jesus. But in heaven he was a former archangel.

Ok, a simple question. tell me, what kind of serpent?

And you STILL!!! haven't told us how this episode was written about consider that there were only to beings present? So when you are ready,

Satan was a master of disguises.The master Paul in 2 Corinthians 11:14 tells us that Satan “masquerades” as an angel of light”, and he is certainly anything but that.

So Paul was wrong in your opinion, yes or no?

And you STILL!!! haven't told us how this episode was written about consider that there were only to beings present? So when you are ready,

Unfortunately Bart Ehrman despite his brilliant scholarship will stand behind 2 billion Christians who will be chosen over him because of his lack of faith.

Ok so just like you like to only choose the chapters and verse from the bible that suite you, are choosing to cherry-pick only the parts from Bart Ehrman's work the you like. Well what a hypocrite you are. And how many times: appealing to numbers counts for nothing.

In Matthew 16, we read of a critical moment when Jesus asks his apostles who others say that he, Jesus, is. 

Indeed he does. But if you read your bible written in English it leaps from the page that Jesus didn't trust Simon as far as he could throw him.

He simply had to keep Simon/peter on side by making promises about who would receive what when the/his mission was complete. . Simon didn't just betray Jesus three times at cock crow as most of you Christians believe. He turned up as a witness against Jesus at his trial. He also didn't believe Jesus was a Messiah. And on that particular point - Jesus was supposed to have said to Simon and the others: " do not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah" Mat 16:20, when no one had mentioned the word Messiah . Simon only called him " son of the living god" which, before you decide to claim have the same meaning are not the same thing..

There is no way on this earth that Jesus would have handed "the keys to the kingdom" (Jerusalem) to Simon, because he knew what a 19 faced bastard he was and that Simon (just like Joh the Baptist) was working for his own ends. Indeed Jesus wouldn't have trusted Simon with the keys to the local ἀφεδρών. All my own opinion of course..

And from the same chapter that you chose(Matthew 16) and just as he told Simon not to mention that he was a Messiah in other places he told others not to talk about his so called "miracles" and identity. He certainly wanted to keep his mission under wraps, didn't he faux?

And for all of your filibustering above, you have still managed to swerve my question Why so?

Here it is again>>And what truth has god revealed to you concerning the multiple flaws, mistranslations and out-right contradictions in the Bible?

Bart Ehrman was a brilliant scholar 

I agree and a lot more knowledgeable than you. And more honest too.

Though I do not think that Satan has a bodily form and if he does,

I see. so when Satan himself tells god that he has been Walking to and fro upon the earth, he didn't mean physically walking ? You christians just love making shite up when you have no answers to these little niggling anomalies do you.

My theory has been that Satan utilized the body of the serpent to physically talk to Adam and Eve since snakes are not evil inherently.

Stop it! So why not take human form if he is able to change his form and simply speak as ahu man would do to another human?

The name Satan means adversity or opponent,

I know what it means.

so I'm not so sure that he has a physical form or not,

Then you haven't read you bible.

The idea of walking to and fro in Job, is allegorical or metaphorical to tell the story.

the bible states otherwise.

You may have no interest in researching Greek and Hebrew.

More presumptions about me. You really are a haughty prick aren't you Faux?

You swerved my question gain, faux: HERE> And what truth has god revealed to you concerning the multiple flaws, mistranslations and out-right contradictions in the Bible?

Why we believe:

The idea of God "incarnating" as a man is to pay the price of sin for mankind. Hebrews chapter 9 states that the blood of bulls and goats were not able to remove sin, but the death of a sinless man created an opening for the guilty to identify with the death of Jesus. SO, in order for us, mankind, to remove the sin from our lives we needed a perfect sacrifice to identify with.

This doesn't explain why it had to be a blood sacrifice and you haven't explained why. Is all you have done here is made statement about what you believe.

Why it "HAD TO HAPPEN" is all in God's plan.

there is nothing in the bible that states why a man had to be beaten half to death, nailed to a wooden cross and speared between the ribs. resulting in a mans agonising, torturous cruel death.

I suppose God could have made a galactic proclamation of "all sins of people wanting pardon will be pardoned by the standing on their heads for 5 minutes!" I can only assume that this "becoming flesh" was to make it to where humankind can understand and resonate with His actions.

Indeed and standing on ones head for 5 minutes would have been a lot less cruel.

Satan’s curse to crawl on his belly was a symbolic curse of humiliation.

Nope and you cannot prove it . The bible clearly states the sentence that Satan was said to receive as punishment for deceiving mankind. Genesis 3:14

Good did not amputate Satan’s legs.

Yes all very strange this isn't it. Considering that Satan was already referred to being a "serpent to begin with

So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,

“Cursed are you above all livestock

    and all wild animals!

You will crawl on your belly

    and you will eat dust

    all the days of your life. Genesis 3:14

There again if you had read your bible you would understand the anything that crawled along the ground was considered to be a serpent in those times; even a scorpion.<<<< that was a clue to this dilemma, for bible dunces such as yourself and faux the thick.

Off you go now.

Debby Wrote: Scholars have pointed the human errors caused by human error

Stephen wrote: Stop making me laugh, I take my favourite subject quite seriously at the best of times.

So you believe that one has to be a "scholar" to point out and highlight the multitudes of errors, flaws, mistakes, and outright contradictions that make up these ambiguous half stories in the English bible.

Can name for me a few of the hawkeyed scholars please?

Debby Wrote:Bible scholars like Bart Ehrman studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic so they could read the original Old Testament and NewTestament copies of the manuscripts and point to the errors in translation from the originals.

people who can only read the translated versions have nothing to compare it with. Bart Ehrman has written several books on these errors he found which are used in Theology colleges.

I see. So there two things there that prove my case and not yours, you absolute clown.

(1) Bart Ehrman , as I have shown you many times now doesn't believe Jesus was god . he doesn't believe Jesus died on the cross and he has pointed out that the so called "miracles " said to have been performed by Jesus were nothing more the were initiation rituals into his sect of followers.

(2) by reminding everyone reading here that Bart Ehrman had studied other languages such as "Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic" to get to the "truth" of what the gospels are trying to convey to its readers further supports my case that the BIBLE written in ENGLISH isn't worth the paper that it is written on. And further if you have read or watch anything by Bart Ehrman (which I doubt very much) you will learnd that he believes the gods(PLURAL) and that they came to earth in vehicles .

And no surprises Other BIBLICAL scholars that have also studied those languages you mention above don't agree with at all with you favoured scholar Bart Ehrman . So suck it up and choke on your own BS.

Did Jesus Even Claim to be God? Bart Ehrman Says No...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2STiabRV8TE

Please read the Bible for your own salvation and obvious ignorance.

Read it many time thank you "Debby"

Who was Satan that he could test God?

God allowed Satan to test human faithfulness.Satan acts within limitations permitted by God.

And you can prove that BS can you? You do realise what it is that you are saying with that ridiculous statement, don't you? Considering that Jesus, according to you, is God!?

AND, I noticed that you gave this little anomaly a giant swerve.

He [Satan] was also condemned to crawl on his belly for the rest of his days too wasn't he Genesis 3:14

But that didn't last long did it?

No: because its not long before we read of Satan WALKING about around on the earth!!

One day the heavenly beings came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them. The Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Satan answered the Lord, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it.”Job1:6-7

So when did Satan get his legs reattached?

Scholars have pointed the human errors caused by human error

Stop making me laugh, I take my favourite subject quite seriously at the best of times.

So you believe that one has to be a "scholar" to point out and highlight the multitudes of errors, flaws, mistakes, and outright contradictions that make up these ambiguous half stories in the English bible.

Can name for me a few of the hawkeyed scholars please?

Stephen wrote:Who is to say which parts are truth, You!?

fauxlaw wrote: No. I have already said: the truth comes directly from God to each person who asks with sincere faith that an answer will be given.

And what truth has god revealed to you concerning the multiple flaws, mistranslations and out-right contradictions in the Bible?

 I can't help you until you move past that obstacle yourself. You and I have had this argument for a number of years. I stand ready; you seem to stand defiant. So be it.

You have also rendered the bible pointless and redundant by crowing about one has to understand Ancient Greek and Hebrew, there by condemning the bible written in English deeper in the trash can. you just cant decide it that it is now up to god who and who doesn't get to understand the bible.writen in plain English. You make yourself out to be the clown that I believe you are.

Stephen wrote: "During his lifetime Jesus himself didn't call himself god and didn't consider himself to be god. And none of his disciples had even an inkling at all that he was god". [citation from a YouTube video]

fauxlaw wrote:I do not take an ad hoc YouTube video to be authoritative to the extent of knowing what a god is in order to justify claiming that Jesus was not a god. . Therefore, the YouTube video creators simply cannot read and interpret the English language. Jesus Christ is a god.

So you are telling us that you dismiss the opinions and views of(the speaker in the YouTube video) the distinguished

Professor Bart Ehrman, author of some 30 books on religion and who is more than qualified to speak on such matters ?

Therefore, the YouTube video creators simply cannot read and interpret the English language. Jesus Christ is a god.

Neither can you. But the person in the YT video Professor and scholar Bart Ehrman, can, and very will too.

Interesting bio>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman and a lot more interesting than those children's books you claim to author.

As is the video in question>>>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C96FPHRTuQU

Bart Ehrman accepts the validity of Jesus as a historical fact. 

I have no problem believing a man named Jesus existed when he did. What's your point.

Therefore, to say [Stephen] "you have have rendered it unreliable as a source of information regarding the life and time of Jesus and by your own admission condemned it to the trash can sunshine, not me."

That is disingenuous. Every book of non-fiction has truth and error. even some fiction has truth; I dare say a lot of it.

Nope. It is, as I have said, worthless. It is supposed to be the teachings of god but by your own admission it has been corrupted and therefore it has been rendered worthless.

Don't throw out the truth with the error and think you have fairly comprehended what you read.

Who is to say which parts are truth, You!?

Well, first read it, cover-to-cover. That you have not is evident. Do it!

Well that is rather assumptious of you. You really are a arrogant prick aren't you.

or, shut the piehole and put down you pen. Scholarship requires reading, doesn't it? Have you forgotten how that is done?

Now now. Don't get angry with me because of your own haughty assumptions about me have backfired. I'll say it again, YOU have condemned ALL bibles written in the English language to the trash can. YOU have proven to anyone reading here that the bible written in English is not worth the paper it is written on. Not me.

I happen to believe quite a bit of the bible. I believe many of the characters existed and many of the stories therein. I just don't agree with the way it has come down to us and they way it has been preached to us by arrogant gasconading haughty pricks like yourself , Faux

Off you go now faux. Oh and re-read your bible. I have read quite a few times myself.

The Bible has stood the test of time. The errors in the Bible are human errors made during the copying and reproducing process which scholars have identified and corrected.

Ok. First you have said it was the ghost that corrected the multiple errors in the bible now you are saying it is scholars that have made these corrections.

So give me biblical examples that have been corrected by the scholars. ie which verses and or chapters have been corrected.

Remember Satan was banished from heaven. His fall is mentioned in Isaiah 14:12, Ezekiel 28:12 and Revelation 12:7.

He was also condemned to crawl on his belly for the rest of his days too wasn't he Genesis 3:14

But that didn't last long did it?

No: because its not long before we read of Satan WALKING about around on the earth!!

One day the heavenly beings came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them. The Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Satan answered the Lord, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it.”Job1:6-7

God just cannot control his creation can he?

Or is this yet another one of those flaws and or mistranslations that Fauxlaw likes to flag every time I highlight such blatant contradictions.

And you haven't even tried to explain anything in the OP.

Who was Satan that he could test God?

Why did Satan ask Jesus/god to prove who he was?

Why did god have to go out to the wilderness to be tested in the first place?

And how does anyone know what was said or what happened when there were only two being present?

Why wasn't Jesus recognised by Satan? after all, they were both there at the start of it all if we are to believe the bible and the Christian belief.

Stephen Wrote: And by [ YOU] admitting to us that the BIBLE written in English is "fallible" simply means that it cannot be trusted as a reliable source and may as well be condemned to the trash can.

fallible

: faliable to be erroneous:

Completely? No, the word does not necessarily imply total error, but does allow partial error to still be erroneous.

1. Einstein, for example:The Cosmological Constant
2. Gravitational Waves
3. Light Bending Calculation
4. 
   

Quantum Mechanics (throughout his life):

But we aren't talking any of the above, now are we. We are talking about a book written by human hand in the English language that you have admitted is not without flaws nor mistakes. And the particular copy we are discussing is the copy written in English.

You have have rendered it unreliable as a source of information regarding the life and time of Jesus and by your own admission condemned it to the trash can sunshine, not me.

Stephen wrote:

You do realise that not a single time does the word Christian or Christianity get the slightest mention in any of the gospels. Jesus was a Jew, get over it. He came to unite the Jewish tribes and he failed. He also failed didn't bring peace to the earth as promised. He failed to free the Jews from the roman yoke as was expected of a messiah and he failed to rebuild the temple too.

Learn your bible.

Debby wrote: These were not teaching of Judaism by Jesus but teachings of a new beginning what was called Christianity with Jesus Christ as its central figure.

Oh PLEEEASe!!!. Jesus did nothing but quote and or elude to the Old Testament in his teachings. Are you now trying to tell us the the OT was also a Christian idea? What did Jesus read from when he gave a sermon in the temple? What scripture was Jesus explaining in Luke20? neither could have been from the NT now could it?

Stephen wrote: "During his lifetime Jesus himself didn't call himself god and didn't consider himself to be god. And none of his disciples had even an inkling at all that he was god". [citation from a YouTube video]

fauxlaw wrote:I do not take an ad hoc YouTube video to be authoritative to the extent of knowing what a god is in order to justify claiming that Jesus was not a god. . Therefore, the YouTube video creators simply cannot read and interpret the English language. Jesus Christ is a god.

So you are telling us that you dismiss the opinions and views of(the speaker in the YouTube video) the distinguished

Professor Bart Ehrman, author of some 30 books on religion and who is more than qualified to speak on such matters ?

Therefore, the YouTube video creators simply cannot read and interpret the English language. Jesus Christ is a god.

Neither can you. But the person in the YT video Professor and scholar Bart Ehrman, can, and very will too.

Interesting bio>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman and a lot more interesting than those children's books you claim to author.

As is the video in question>>>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C96FPHRTuQU

Jesus's tempter was Satan/ the Devil we are told.

Mathew4:1Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.

Right off the bat this story falls apart if it is to be taken literally? Because immediately the “devil” begins his test by saying;

4:3“If you are the Son of God.” [?]command that these stones be made bread”.

When that didn’t go down as the devil thought it might, he had another go:

4:6 “If thou be the Son of God” [?] cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee”….

When this didn’t appear to bare fruit, the devil changed tactics by trying a bribe.

Mathew4: 8 Again,the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me”.

IF!? It appears then that the devil didn't even know who Jesus was.

It should be noticed too that, just like there was no witness to the conversation between Pilate and Jesus, or Nicodemus and Jesus, here too there wasn’t a single witness to this meeting in the desert, so how do the gospel writers know what was said? I do hope the Christians here will explain that for us?

Anyway, Jesus, you may not be surprised, refused the bribe and passed the test! And why wouldn’t he have? He was god and the son of god also wasn’t he, and everybody knew it didn’t they………. accept the devil it seems.

So how come that old devil Satan didn’t even recognise god when he seen him!?

After all, didn’t he exist with all the other heavenly beings even before mankind?   Doesn’t Luke's gospel speak of Satan falling from that heavenly abode? Luke 10:18

Didn't god once tell Satan to his face that he would be on his belly eating dirt for the rest of his days? Genesis3:14

We know too that the devil had wagered face to face with god that ended with in the deaths of all of Jobs 10 children. Job1:6-7. (Christians have never explained how it came pass that Satan came to be “walking here and there”, roaming around the earth.” after being sentenced to crawl and eat dirt for ever?)

How is it that the “demon” calling himself legion recognised god/son of god and Satan didn’t?  “He shouted at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Mark5:7

It appears that this ambiguous story of Satan testing god is beyond absurd, it is outright stupidity at its worst that only a child or the cretinous adult would believe.

While Jesus was still on earth he told his disciples to spread his word to all the world. That was the start of Christianity based on Jesus as the central figure.

Mark 16:15

He said to them,”Go into all the world and preach the good news to everyone.

Yes this is what is known as the great commission. So what? It doesn't say go out into the world a preach a brand new religion called Christianity

You do realise that not a single time does the word Christian or Christianity get the slightest mention in any of the gospels. Jesus was a Jew, get over it. He came to unite the Jewish tribes and he failed. He also failed didn't bring peace to the earth as promised. He failed to free the Jews from the roman yoke as was expected of a messiah and he failed to rebuild the temple too.

Learn your bible.

Debby wrote: #46 above "The Bible is infallible because it is God’s inspired WORD. The errors we see in the Bible are human errors and translation errors which the HolyGhost was sent to remedy."

So AGAIN! for the sixth time which BIBLICAL "human errors" and "translation errors" did the ghost remedy and correct?

You just can't point out a single one can you?

Stephen wrote: you have rendered all bibles written in the English language pointless and redundant.

fauxlaw Wrote: No, I have not. I am very careful to write what I think, and that is not the conclusion to which I arrived on this string.

I understand your conclusion. Yours are almost the same as mine. Only its that you just cannot admit that in addition, I also conclude that because the BIBLE written in English (new testament in particular) is riddled with flaws, inconsistencies, contradictions and errors and half told ambiguous stories that all simply jump off the page and which therefore renders it useless, pointless, redundant and unreliable as source of information regarding the life time of the Christ. And by admitting to us that the BIBLE written in English is "fallible" simply means that it cannot be trusted as a reliable source and may as well be condemned to the trash can.

Get over yourself faux.

fallible

: faliable to be erroneous:

 capable of making a mistake

erroneous: Wrong. incorrect.