and where does Jesus say, "I am God, and I am here to found a new religion called 'Christianity' The Law is now null and void, totally revoked. Do what ever you want. Forget about Kosher, Sabbath and Circumcism. Btw, make big statues of me and my mom and worship them on your knees, and kill the Jews and anyone else who stands in your way." Where in the four "gospels", chosen and rewritten by the church councils, does Yeshu ben Yoseph say all this?

Yes I did see that.. as you can now see in the above posts

Christainity was formed from 'christ' to identify the believers in Christ ie Christ---ainity


There is one God; mankind is one; the foundations of religion are one. Let us worship Him, and give praise for all His great Prophets and Messengers who have manifested His brightness and glory.

(Abdu'l-Baha, Abdu'l-Baha in London, p. 20)



Religion

To most men who have not heard the message of this teaching, religion seems an outward form, a pretence, merely a seal of respectability. Some priests are in holy office for no other reason than to gain their living. They themselves do not believe in the religion they pretend to teach. Would these men lay down their lives for their faith? Ask a Christian of this kind to deny Christ in order to save his life, and he will do it.

Ask a Bahá'í to deny any of the great Prophets, to deny his faith or to deny Moses, Muhammad or Christ, and he will say: I would rather die. So a Muhammadan Bahá'í is a better Christian than many so called Christians.

A Bahá'í denies no religion; he accepts the Truth in all, and would die to uphold it. He loves all men as his brothers, of whatever class, of whatever race or nationality, of whatever creed or colour, whether good or bad, rich or poor, beautiful or hideous. He commits no violence; if he is struck he does not return the blow. He calls nothing bad, following the example of the Lord Bahá'u'lláh. As a safeguard against intemperance he does not drink wine or spirits. Bahá'u'lláh has said it is not good for a sane man to take that which will destroy his health and sense.

The religion of God has two aspects in this world. The spiritual (the real) and the formal (the outward). The formal side changes, as man  57  changes from age to age. The spiritual side which is the Truth, never changes. The Prophets and Manifestations of God bring always the same teaching; at first men cling to the Truth but after a time they disfigure it. The Truth is distorted by man-made outward forms and material laws. The veil of substance and worldliness is drawn across the reality of Truth.

As Moses and Jesus brought their Message to the people, so Bahá'u'lláh brings the same Message.

Each time God sends a Great One to us we are given new life, but the Truth each Manifestation brings is the same. The Truth never changes but man's vision changes. It is dulled and confused by the complication of outward forms.

The Truth is easy to understand although the outward forms in which it is expressed bewilder the intelligence. As men grow they see the futility of man-made forms and despise them. Therefore many leave the churches, because the latter often emphasize the external only

(Abdu'l-Baha, Abdu'l-Baha in London, p. 55)

Yeah, that's exactly what I think. It sounds too absurd that people who dont worship Jesus or havent even heard of him cant go to heaven, even though they've been good all their life. Makes no sense at all.

As for the other people who replied, you're right. Despite all of the claims that "Christianity is the one truth faith and everyone else is wrong", it's really just a man-made religion. The bible was written by people who had interpeted the "message of God" into their own words.

I mean, if Christianity is the "true faith", then why are there so many versions of the bible?

Of course! Exactly! This is because the bible is not a book for specific people, it is a book that wrote and taught about the making of this universe, there are many times where I have wanted to tell people here about the whole big picture, I guess people are just too stubborn to actually take the time and read I guess, or for that matter, absorb it.

Too many people, already taken in that the church is an evil man made foundation of lies and hate.

The Bible doesn't go into detail about what happens to those who never hear of Jesus. An argument can be made both ways about whether you go to heaven or not. In the end it's not up to us to judge that. The Bible separates us into two categories - those who have heard and believed the message, and those who have heard and rejected the message. It's all well and good to guess what the Bible might say about those who haven't heard, but in all reality, there are very few people in this world who can claim that as an excuse.

It's the problem in translating to ENglish from Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic. It's good that most translations are taken from the original source....

Regards, PA

"So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch." - Acts 11:26

There where no such things as christians back then

Acts 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

What are you new here on earth?? LOL there was no such things as christians back then..for crying out load....christians didnt come along till long after Jesus left the earth

The person that wrote Acts 11:26, who stated that the disciples were called Christians in the first century, was Luke, a medical doctor and a convert to Christianity that lived in the first century, and he is telling an historical fact.
He is the author of the gospel of Luke and Acts of the apostles. He accompanied the apostle Paul in his ministry in the first century.
His account is reliable.
You, are mistaken.

[The quote was from the King James version bible, translated from the majority text also called the Byzantine or textus receptus, the received text. It is accurate, being copied and recopied word for word and handed down through the centures by Christian believers in the Greek speaking world. A copy of this Greek text in Syriac, called the Pesh**ta can be traced to AD 250 or around that time being mentioned in ancient writings.]

Maybe not.

No mate I aint mistaken...the fact is..there where NO christians back then everyone knows that

How did the term "textus receptus" originate?
It originated through a highly exaggerated statement -- actually a publisher's blurb -- in the preface to the second edition of the Greek New Testament that was published in Holland in 1633 by the Elzevir brothers. In this Latin preface they called their book "the text which is now received by all, in which we give nothing changed or corrupted." This is how this Latin term textus receptus (text received) came to be applied to a particular text of the Greek New Testament. On the European continent, aside from Great Britain, the first Elzevir edition (pub. 1624) was for a long time the standard edition of the Greek New Testament.


Did the King James translators use this "textus receptus" as the basis for their translation?
No. Even the first Elzevir edition was not published until 13 years after the date of the KJV

That's cool, BM. What you quoted is the same as the link I provided. Maybe if it's read twice, it'll sink in.

Thats where I got it from LOL

Christian didnt form till long after Jesus died..thats a fact

I see - so why is the word 'Christian' in there? btw, when this was written, Jesus HAD left the earth.

I KNEW IT!!!!!!!!

That's it, of course, now I know what's going on, BM, you don't think Jesus is the Messiah do you?

The Messiah rose, or is supposed to rise from the dead, meaning resurrection, Jesus had no physical death and then just wrot to the ground, but the only way for you to consider him "dead" is to say that he is not the Messiah.

Got ya.

Ummm what makes you THINK for a split sec I never thought Jesus was the messiah? ohh do tell this should be good lol

But the whole time I was trying to say...
Meaning there where NO SUCH THINGS as christian back when Jesus was here and still Anti againing and PA threw their info at me that didnt relate to what I was trying to say
The Bible mentions
Christian twice: Ac 26:28 and 1Pe 4:16
Christians once: Ac 11:26 <---Uhuh long after Jesus's time on earth...hee hee!!

Keep in mind the NT was not written for atleast 50-60 years after the events supposedly took place. SO I was right...christians where not around back then untill way after Jesus died LOL abnd then shortly approx 50-60 years in came the NEW testament...

I kept saying there where NO such things as christians when Jesus was here on earth...but a few just kept posting the dribble thinking they had me hook line and sinker...when the truth is I WAS RIGHT ha ha ha See the bible NT was written by a christian...so he had to have put them in there but in reality they didnt come about untill WAY WAY WAAAYYYY After Jesus...la la la la

It's highlighted right there, you said "Jesus died" you never stated that he left the earth on God's terms, you said he DIED, which is completely different, Christ's followers were Christians BM, because they believed him to be the son of God.

But all I heard was "there were no Christians, that is, until long after the death of Jesus", those who knew and know him as the Messiah would have known that Jesus died, but he came back from the dead, am I mistaken? Wait a minute BM, your the one who says that he's dead and people didn't become Christians until long after he rested in peace, is this hard to understand? That statement says to me "Jesus was a great prophet, but he was not the Messiah."

All about the choice of words.

Jesus did die like it or not (and he is still dead unless you think he is alive and living in India as Budddah lol..and he keeps changing his appearence over and over again lol) and although the bible says he rose again...if that is true then he was just a ghost to those that saw him, cuz he didn't live on on earth...maybe in his fathers kingdome but if he appeared to his sppostles ect he must of only did it as a ghost...think about it...they didnt OR MAY NOT have heard of ghosts or even believed in ghosts.......so when they saw Jesus again they thought he was just himself....but IMO he was a ghost...and people didnt call themselves CHRISTIANS untill at least a vast number of years long AFTER Jesus left...way after

NOW Boltys thats MY belief

If he was indeed a ghost, then I don't see how the apostles were able to touch and identify christs wounds. Unless of course your under the assumption that ghosts / apparations also have physical bodies.

Thats only cuz your bibles says so....I dont believe the bible stories...therefore IMO he was nothing more than a ghost....there is a difference between what you believe and what I believe

And your bible says he is a ghost ?. So you believe in the part where he was born, and was crucified, but after that you close the book ?. Must be nice to just pick and choose what you want from a religion to meet your lifestyle.

Umm I didnt say I have a bible lol......I dont have a bible...I do however have my own version of the bible that I wrote myself (just a few stories) I believe he was born..but not in the way the bible says so...sorry...I believe he was born on a different month than Dec...I believe that when he was a teenager he traveled and did a lot of study.....I believe he was indeed very smart...i believe he married and had kids...this is part of my belief..if you cant respect that..TOUGH

Dude pay attention in the class Geri has said she doesn't do bibles or religions.......Like about 1oo times lol.....

I have said it over and over so many times I say it in my sleep now LOL See Sheri the reason WHY people like him have yapped on at me..is because I DONT THINK LIKE THEM so they DONT respect my own beliefs...funny only the christians do this crap to me...why?? LOL I dont know

Therefore, you do have a bible/book that you follow.



I respect your own beliefs, I was only questioning them. You always seem to jump to such sudden conclusions without specific evidence.

Its the philosophy....Anything different can't be fathomed or understood its a one track construct ........IMO eventually most outgrow the construct of seperation and realize that, diversity and uniquenss and kindness and embracing another is really their nature lol....Everyone eventually becomes a bridge instead of a wall.....as i often say...lol

Actually the Pesh**ta can be dated to around 150 AD, a hundred years earlier, and it is a byzantine or majority text, which matches the King James New Testament.
The "oldest and one of the most
excellent of the versions" (to quote Scrivener) which is the
translation of the Greek into Syriac called the Pesh**ta. Paul's
missionary base was at Antioch, in Syria, and the Syriac-speaking
Christians had the Scriptures translated into their own language. It
is universally acknowledged that the Pesh**ta is a translation of the
Byzantine text and, according to church historians (Eusebius and
others), the Pesh**ta dates from c AD 150. Terence H Brown confirms
that "the Syriac version was older by two centuries than the Nestorian
heresy (AD 431)".
[Nestorian heresy refers to the alterations in the texts made by gnostic heretics in Alexandria Egypt in the 4th century. Modern versions have the Alexandrian text mixed in them and about 5% of it is errors and changes.]
The King James version New Testament is translated from the original text, unaltered.

Once again, maybe not.

"Next, we have the Syriac Vulgate text called the Pesh**ta, (P). P is the oldest version of the whole Syriac NT to have survived complete. Evidence for the use of the P version first appears at Edessa around AD 411 and so P is thought to date from the late 4th or early 5th century AD. P is a Syriac text that has been meticulously revised to be quite close to a Greek text, sacrificing a little linguistic elegance in the process. P retains a few archaic readings which show it to be a revision of an Old Syriac text rather than a completely fresh translation. The career of the P version has not yet ended. From its first appearance in the 5th century, it has become gradually more popular and today it is used by every Syriac speaking denomination."
Source.



The KJV is very altered.

Rachel not to mention the King James version isn't excepted as valid by christians because the writter was gay...lol

I know. But, for some reason it's still number 1 with the fundamentalists. I know this because that's what I was raised with. In fact, the private school I went with demanded that the only Bible you bring to school was the KJV. If I'd only known then that King James was gay.

Have you ever stop to think...What is the real truth?, i mean can anyone really prove Jesus existed?, i thonk not, History is not the truth, it is however some ones point of view or how he or she has expirienced its cultures surroundings, so people?, DO THE ASIAN PEOPLE WILL GO TO HELL BECOUSE THEY ARE NOT XTIANS? give me a break, thats all bull$%&!, the bible and all that crap...

WHAT??? Or for pete's sake, that's the biggest load of crap I have ever heard taken in seriousness about Jesus, that's totally over the head! Jesus didn't return as a ghost because his body was found nowhere in the tomb he was buried in, and no Becky's_Mom the Romans did not put him there to begin with, he was taken down from the cross after he died, and then put behind a stone slab, on the third day he was resurrected and returned to his physical body, with holes in his hands and feet.

Even in the bible Jesus says "if I were a ghost would I have resembling wounds? I am not of an apparition, but as you saw me before I was condemned by the hands of men."

This whole discussion is pointless, I'm not going to argue with these details, you can make Jesus out to whatever you want to be, he's your little barbie doll BM, I guess you could say.

Sherri and BM: For the record, it would not be wise to question Azalin's experience with Christianity, he is a Roman Catholic and was once a priest.

That is all.

The word Christian does not appear in the bible beacause its a realigion formed after the bible was written...

Not so, your thinking of the Torah, or the Old Testament, there were Christians around the time of Jesus because they were his followers.

I don't see why this is so hard to get.......

Think!, where does the word Christian comes from?, Or Christ?, HUH?

How would anyone know? Here's what I don't get, we know that a Christ like figure existed within some timeframe, and this is because of the Pagan gods before his recorded time, now, they're could have been thousands of different calendars and dates recording his lifetime, and the Pagans could have just as easily taken the story and mistook it for something else, quite possibly in other and similar languages it began to form different and various names, thus forming Osyrius, Mythra, Dionysius, and Erkies, why would there be four Pagan saviors one after another if they were supposed to die for the sake of humanity?

Who knows really......

Well i actually know, Christ means, MAN IN THE ROSS, the you go JESUS THE CHRISTH, and the Christianism was formed after that...i suppose

Hmmmm.......interesting

WHO the flute do you think you are showing disrespect to what I believe bolty?? How dare you mock my belief...do it again and ill report you got that?

The word "christ" comes from the hebrew word Khriein which meants to "anoint ", and or "messiah". This is translated into latin and then comes Christus for "anointed one ", and from there, is shortended into Christ for modern day english.

Jesus is also called simply, Jesus of Nazareth. This is because in the Roman era, and especially in the Middle Ages many last names were from the city you grew up in, or, the name of your father and or heritage. For example, you may have someone named Sir David of England, or Sir Ross from Rome. Also, introduce yourself as Sir David, son of Charles, or Sir Ross, son of Luther. Therefore you have different names that can be associated with Jesus. Jesus of Nazareth , Jesus Christ ( anointed one ) , or Jesus, son of God.

As a young catholic..I was taught it was - Jesus of Nazareth NOT Nazarus

UHMN then you have to tell me where does the word CROSS comes from huh?

Or answer me this, Then why was Jesus named Christ after he was put in the Cross?

You call me paranoid and next thing your going to report me for mocking your belief and faith???

Don't that beat all, it's funny I wasn't under the impression that because I found the idea of Jesus being an apparation valid you have to go to your "over the board" assumptions.

Seriously though please report me.

POST 92 claearly show you acting DISRESPECTFUL towards my belief all because I said Jesus came back as a ghost..I stated it was my belief and you ATTACKED saying it was a load of CRAP...who's paranoid?
See not only do you show disrespect for MY belief but now look at you acting the lil baby grow up bolty

You are right, sorry. Someone had me answering questions just before about Lazarus and I got carried away lol.



Jesus was not named Christ by the romans. He was named Christ from his apostles, and before hand by prophets.

" I know that Messiah cometh, which is called Christ..."
John 4:25

And obviously, the words that very much led to his death.

" But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses? Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death."
Mark 14:61-64

If you are wondering about what was said on his cross plaque, it was " IESVS NAZARENVS REX IVDÆORVM ", which means Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.

LOL you ar ok Azalin...I knew what you meant LOL I knew it was a typo on your behalf

And yes I agree from what I read and what I was taught it was the apostles that named him christ...

BTW I am only saying what I was once taught...not saying I believe lol