pajarito

I admit that this isn't "concrete" yet and it may have already been mentioned (if so, I apologize), however, I think this is interesting in regards to simply the existence of Jesus. "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus"

I feel better... I think if you're a dirt-bag, whether you're Republican, Democrat, or Independent, you should be called on it.

It all goes back to honesty, integrity, and trustworthiness. That’s why I say that there’s more to morality than just doing whatever you want as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else. If you cheat on your wife, you are being dishonest and deceiving and your character is flawed. If you inappropriately spend the public’s money, you are also being dishonest and deceiving and your character is flawed. C.S. Lewis described it this way. He said there are two ways in which we go wrong. One has to do with what you do as it negatively affects another person. The other is what you do that negatively affects yourself. In modern society, the focus tends to be on the first. Do whatever you want as long as it doesn’t hurt someone else. However, the second is more important than the first and directly affects the second. If one is flawed morally, he/she will inevitably affect others negatively. There is a third and even more important aspect to morality IMO, however, I won’t bring that up here. I say that neither political party has “the moral high ground.” I think we should focus on the individual and evaluate his/her internal qualities first.

If you're at the Convention this year, I'll buy you a "free beer." It's all good...

Ok...ok...

Yet another

Really...I'm just seeing if you can almost fill up this entire page with your post barrage. You're up to 11. Go Zen...go Zen....

Another clicky

Clicky

I agree. Just making an observation. Shakespeare

How do you know Shakespeare really wrote that?

Man... The likes of You, Philykev, and Kallend never ceases to amaze me. You guys are so much smarter and more "analytical" than the rest of us. I'll bet if we could wire all of your brains together we could run at least a 10KW generator and power a house.

Although I hold to many "reformed" beliefs, this is where I differ in opinion. I can't justify in my mind the act of infant baptism. The Presbyterians believe that it is kind of what circumcision used to be signifying a covenant with God and that is performed immediately. It is done with the idea that both parents are believers and that the church then comes together to assist and support in any way possible to raise the child in a Christian environment. However, I believe baptism is a public profession of faith as demonstrated by Jesus himself. Although I firmly believe that a person will not naturally turn to God without God's intervention in the first place, I don't believe one can do that until he/she has developed the capability to understand why he/she is making that decision. It is my opinion that an infant cannot do that and that the infant should be "dedicated" rather than baptized. Children are "accounted" for in reference to salvation anyway up until the "age of accountability" and only God knows exactly when that is. I think, however, that it is crucial to ensure that children go to church and make that part of their learned lifestyle.

Going out to eat. Later!

Prior to that, I guess I would have probably considered myself an atheist, if I thought about it much. That is, until I found out that God doesn't believe in atheists.

That never got very far with me either. Like I've said before, I didn't grow up in a Christian home, didn't have much of a Christian influence aside from my Granddad before he died, I very rarely went to church at all, and didn't make a decision until I was 27 and I'm now 35.

Is that what you think I've done? Made up my mind before doing any research? On another note, because of what I said before, I almost respect an Atheist more than an Agnostic because at least they will make up their minds, make a choice, and take a stand.

Fair enough... However, it kind of sounds kind of like floating under a round parachute, like I used to do in the military, at the mercy of the wind as opposed to flying my Sabre into the wind (the right direction) on final approach toward the target "X" on the DZ. You're still at the mercy of the wind but there's a whole lot more control. That is, if the argument is just to argue, never really reach a conclusion, or if you do, it is easily swayed in another direction. What's the point? I agree that one needs to have an open mind and see all sides. I think, however, that one must also be able to make a decision and take a stand. I believe there are certain truths, rights and wrongs in this world and this is one of them. If you don't, I fully respect your position. You're a very good debater! Better than your Dad anyway.

I fully support examination of your beliefs. I think that your belief system better be able to be broken down and put back together again or it's not worth your time. Do you ever come to any conclusions from your critique or is it just the thrill of the debate?

Ok....I still say you'll make a good lawyer. I admit that I wouldn't. Good luck with that.

I get the feeling that you're just sharp-shooting whether you believe what you're spouting or not. You'll make a good lawyer. I only post stuff that I agree with. Are you Jewish (religious not ethnic)? I guess that's none of my business either. By the way, there's emotional faith (warm fuzzy feeling in the airplane) and intellectual faith (can quote 300 Bible verses). The only kind that matters in the end is "saving faith" (true belief).

Why do you need to know? Wendy W. Why did that light a flame under you and draw such a defensive response? People ask what you believe concerning a variety of topics here. It's Speaker's Corner. This topic just happens to include Jesus.

Why do you need to know? Wendy W. Just curious. This is a discussion board. By the way, I was asking her. She doesn't have to answer. I'm not afraid to make crystal clear what I think. I personally think if you're going to argue a side very strongly, then you aught to lay all the cards on the table and be up front with everyone.

It seems like the biggest hang-up (granted, I only skimmed what you posted) was the genealogy of Jesus and the fact that he had no true biological father. The following web page addresses this. http://www.carm.org/questions/2geneologies.htm The next two address fulfilled prophesy. http://www.bible.com/jesus/prophecies.html http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-r004.html By the way, you never really make clear as to what your personal stance is concerning this. Earlier you tried to debunk the 10 Commandments. Now, you're trying to debunk Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God. I'm just wondering if you would, as you made clear with your statement about the 10 Commandments, what exactly do you believe concerning Jesus?

They were looking for a Messiah to come and conquer the Romans. A warrior who would deliver them from their dominatation. The "practicing" Jews (in the religious sense) missed the boat just like everyone else. Gotta go. Be back later.