A heavy load of most atheistic arguments against christianity, is ladened under the rubric of criticizing the christian God, Yahweh. In my opinion, I think any sane, honest person, who has his moral scruples fine tuned, would agree that the christian God is a bit too morally depraved and human-like to be the all-loving creator of the universe.

But in spite of this, and in the midst of the denial and disingenuity, christians cower under an umbrella, which according to them, not only exonerates their God from his evils, but also reinforces their beliefs. This impervious umbrella is Jesus christ. Christians claim that jesus is the son of God and he was sent by God to deliver humanity from sin, and usher in the era of grace, which nullifies all the old testament laws. According to them, Jesus is a bridge that connects them directly to God, a bridge strengthened by the pillars of faith.

But my question is this, and this also forms the thesis of this thread- Is Jesus actually the son of God?

I would like to invite any christian who believes that Jesus is the son of God to tell me why they think he is, and I'll do my best to respond to their answers.

I hope we have a sane, "meme-less," "troll-less" discussion.

I suggest you leave christians to worry about their God while you wallow and wander in your lost wilderness of atheism till you are found

Hell is real!!


You better follow Jesus you little piece of cu.m

I would like to begin this discussion by asking a very salient question: Why should the creator of the universe, in all it's complexity and vastness, have a son?

Anthropomorphization is the lifeblood of religion, especially the pagan religions that preceded Judaism, and it's basically attributing human-like qualities to perceived notions of god.

So if a culture creates a god, they would ascribe features to it that are purely human. Example of these features is reproduction. These cultures in their unabashed ignorance, assume that since they can reproduce, then their god should also be able reproduce, so they ascribe certain qualities to it, like having a wife and then conceiving a son.

Sadly, we also see the above theme in christianity. Why should the creator of the universe have a son? How did this happen? If man was created in God's image, then there had to be sexual intercourse for this to happen. If there was, then where is the mother? If sexual intercourse wasn't required, then did God create Jesus? If he did, then how could he have created himself, since God and Jesus are the same?

You see, when you begin to ask questions like this, you arrive at a pungent hole, reeking with the offensive smell of deceit and ignorance. Deceit in the sense that we have all been forced to buy into a lie. And ignorance in the sense that this story must surely have come from the vacuous minds of ignorant men.

kilode100:
Hell is real!!


You better follow Jesus you little piece of cu.m

Who is this Jesus and why should I follow him? I find it a bit counter-intuitive that you'd ask me to follow someone without describing to me who he is.

I will pretend like I didn't notice the aspersion, which wasn't necessary.

... sane discussions anticipated.

GrizzlyBear:


Who is this Jesus and why should I follow him?

I will pretend like I didn't notice the aspersion, which wasn't necessary.

You are a pretender? You are even more twisted than I thought.


Goodbye hell fire..

kilode100:



You are a pretender? You are even more twisted than I thought.


Goodbye hell fire..

You didn't answer my question. Who is this Jesus you want me to follow?

GrizzlyBear:
I would like to begin this discussion by asking a very salient question: Why should the creator of the universe, in all it's complexity and vastness, have a son?

Anthropomorphization is the lifeblood of religion, especially the pagan religions that preceded Judaism, and it's basically attributing human-like qualities to perceived notions of god.

So if a culture creates a god, they would ascribe features to it that are purely human. Example of these features is reproduction. These cultures in their unabashed ignorance, assume that since they can reproduce, then their god should also be able reproduce, so they ascribe certain qualities to it, like having a wife and then conceiving a son.

Sadly, we also see the above theme in christianity. Why should the creator of the universe have a son? How did this happen? If man was created in God's image, then there had to be sexual intercourse for this to happen. If there was, then where is the mother? If sexual intercourse wasn't required, then did God create Jesus? If he did, then how could he have created himself, since God and Jesus are the same?

You see, when you begin to ask questions like this, you arrive at a pungent hole, reeking with the offensive smell of deceit and ignorance. Deceit in the sense that we have all been forced to buy into a lie. And ignorance in the sense that this story must surely have come from the vacuous minds of ignorant men.

.....
@ the bold up, there you lack understanding. So sorry I say so. The term son of God is a copral body God himself used to dwell within the human race. Jesus is God himself cos in him dwell the fullness og God head.
If you need more clrearification, the bible has an answer for that only if you do believe the written word of God.

GrizzlyBear:


You didn't answer my question. Who is this Jesus you want me to follow?

You can't bait me tell to tell you who Our Lord Jesus Christ is Bro. You know him.

I know you are looking for a chance to blasphem but it won't be on my watch.


You are lost and you need to find your way back.

Bye Son

kingk:
.....
@ the bold up, there you lack understanding. So sorry I say so. The term son of God is a copral body God himself used to dwell within the human race. Jesus is God himself cos in him dwell the fullness og God head.
If you need more clrearification, the bible has an answer for that only if you do believe the written word of God.

Why must the Almighty God and creator of the universe dwell among humans as a human?

Jesus is God himself that created the world .God wanted to save humanited, the blood of animals could not do that he has to come down by himself in a human flesh born of a virgin. Remember God is ominipresence .He manifested as the father, son and the holy spirit.Jesus is the word. you can not seperate a person from his word, in begining was the word and the word is God except you believe in his dealth and his cleansing blood no eternal life for such person.

kilode100:


You can't bait me tell to tell you who Our Lord Jesus Christ is Bro. You know him.

I know you are looking for a chance to blasphem but it won't be on my watch.


You are lost and you need to find your way back.

Bye Son

...coming from the bleeping machine, and gang bangee who takes on 5 guys. You too much.

kingk:
.....
@ the bold up, there you lack understanding. So sorry I say so. The term son of God is a copral body God himself used to dwell within the human race. Jesus is God himself cos in him dwell the fullness og God head.
If you need more clrearification, the bible has an answer for that only if you do believe the written word of God.

I agree that I lack understanding, so can you help me understand?

So if Jesus is the son of God, why did he have to come to earth to die?

"You are my beloved son, in him I am well pleased" Mark 1:11. This verse of the scripture doesn't represent the point you are trying to make. That verse overtly paints the picture of God perceiving Jesus as his son, separate from himself, just the same way a human father would react to his son.

Most of the comments here seem like the vapid reiteration of a popular pentecostal narrative. So I'll proceed on my points.

First of all, it's quite shocking to know that Jews, the same Jews in the old testament who had a personal relationship with God, don't believe that Jesus christ was the son of god. Why is this so and why do christians think otherwise?

Christians are the followers of christ. They believe that Jesus was the son of god prophesied in the old testament. The jews, although not accepting this, still agree with christians on Yahweh being the one true god.
But why don't they accept the Jesus story? I'll explain below.

Jews take their holy books seriously and they interpret most of the words literary and honestly. They have studied their scriptures and there are few prophecies that they believe are to be fulfilled by the messiah that was promised, and these prophecies haven't been fulfilled. Christians on the other hand, look at this same old testament, and interpret some of these prophecies as having been fulfilled by Jesus, or to be fulfilled in his second coming. So who is actually correct here?

Bear in mind that there are jewish rabbis who claim to speak to God everyday and God assures them that Jesus isn't his son.

DeSepiero:


Why must the Almighty God and creator of the universe dwell among humans as a human?

Why would your father that gave birth to you live with you in same house?........remember it is written "now, let's make man in our own image and after our likeness....in his image he created them male and female"

kingk:


Why would your father that gave birth to you live with you in same house?........remember it is written "now, let's make man in our own image and after our likeness....in his image he created them male and female"

You've not answered the question.

The original hebrew word for messiah is Hamoshiach, and this means the anointed one. According to jewish tradition, only kings and priests are anointed. What this means is that according to the prophecies in the old testament, the Hamoshiach promised must have to be either a king or a priest.

According to the old testament and a view all jews hold, is that the requirements for the messiah are as follows.

1. The messiah would build the third temple. Ezekiel 37: 26-28

2. The messiah would gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6)

3. The messiah would usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4) And he was to do this in his life time.

4. The messiah would spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one.
As it says: "HaShem will be King over all the world - on that day, HaShem will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9)

5. The messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David (Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1)

6. The messiah would lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4) If a person is hamoshiach, it is self evident.

Based on the stories about Jesus found in the Christian New Testament, he would not have met a single requirement of a hamoshiach starting with his lack of lineage. The Christian Church invented a concept of 'Messiah' that not only does not exist in Jewish teachings, it directly opposes every single tenet of Judaism.

GrizzlyBear:


I agree that I lack understanding, so can you help me understand?

So if Jesus is the son of God, why did he have to come to earth to die?

"You are my beloved son, in him I am well pleased" Mark 1:11. This verse of the scripture doesn't represent the point you are trying to make. That verse overtly paints the picture of God perceiving Jesus as his son, separate from himself, just the same way a human father would react to his son.

Now let's take a look at the book of daniel 2:34  As you looked, a Stone was cut out without human hands, which smote the image on its feet of iron and [baked] clay [of the potter] and broke them to pieces.

Dose the stone cutted out from the rock different from the rock?.....its all same rock aiit?

Now, how's it difficult for himself to speak telling the people that "the copral body is what he chooses to dwell in and he called the name of that body beloved Son".

Let me begin by saying I am a Christian and I believe that JESUS CHRIST is not only the eeSon of GOD he is also d Saviour of the world

Now while I am not opposed to a discussion on the issue, such must be done in a civilised manner. No amount of discussion will make on fully understand the sonship n Lordship of Jesus Christ.

I will not be able to fully answer your question but my inability to do so does not negate what I believe. There are many unanswered questions about so many things

Cheers n GOD bless

Isaiah 53 is a rubric that most christians use to justify their believe that jesus is the messiah. Christians claim that the coming of Jesus and the way he lived his life, encapsulates the prophecies in Isaiah 53.

But bible scholars and theologians agree that Isaiah 53 wasn't talking about a man, but was a poetic prophesy describing the nation of Israel. Reading the previous chapters- 52 and 51, authenticates this claim.

GrizzlyBear:
Isaiah 53 is a rubric that most christians use to justify their believe that jesus is the messiah. Christians claim that the coming of Jesus and the way he lived his life, encapsulates the prophecies in Isaiah 53.

But bible scholars and theologians agree that Isaiah 53 wasn't talking about a man, but was a poetic prophesy describing the nation of Israel. Reading the previous chapters- 52 and 51, authenticates this claim.

First I dont think all bible scholars n theologians agree on that position
Second is the issue of translation/transliteration and interpretation.

Isaiah 53 to me refers TO JESUS the MESSIAH

The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was. (3:59, Yusif Ali)

Jesus is no more than a messenger of Allah O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs. (4:171, Yusif Ali)

Christ the son of Mary was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how Allah doth make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth! (5:575, Yusif Ali)

Jesus, Son of Mary, did not say to worship himself or Mary And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah'?" He will say: "Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden. (5:116, Yusif Ali)


And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah. (5:46, Yusif Ali)

Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our messengers: We sent after them Jesus the son of Mary, and bestowed on him the Gospel; and We ordained in the hearts of those who followed him Compassion and Mercy. But the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them: (We commanded) only the seeking for the Good Pleasure of Allah; but that they did not foster as they should have done. Yet We bestowed, on those among them who believed, their (due) reward, but many of them are rebellious transgressors. (57:27, Yusif Ali

The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! (9:30, Yusif Ali)

Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute. 35 It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, "Be", and it is. (19:34-35, )

And remember We took from the prophets their covenant: As (We did) from thee: from Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus the son of Mary: We took from them a solemn covenant: (33:7,Yusif Ali)

Jesus was no more than a Servant When (Jesus) the son of Mary is held up as an example, behold, thy people raise a clamour thereat (in ridicule)! 58 And they say, "Are our gods best, or he?" This they set forth to thee, only by way of disputation: yea, they are a contentious people. 59 He was no more than a servant: We granted Our favour to him, and We made him an example to the Children of Israel. (43:57-59, Yusif Ali)

When Jesus came with Clear Signs, he said: "Now have I come to you with Wisdom, and in order to make clear to you some of the (points) on which ye dispute: therefore fear Allah and obey me. (43:63, Yusif Ali)

tunene66:


First I dont think all bible scholars n theologians agree on that position
Second is the issue of translation/transliteration and interpretation.

Isaiah 53 to me refers TO JESUS the MESSIAH

Well, they do, except the ones that are biased. It's even much clearer when you read the original hebrew writings.

Read Isaiah 52 and follow through to 53. You'd understand that it was referring to the nation of Israel. It's all poetry.

GrizzlyBear:


Well, they do, except the ones that are biased. It's even much clearer when you read the original hebrew writings.

Read Isaiah 52 and follow through to 53. You'd understand that it was referring to the nation of Israel. It's all poetry.

Isa 52:1-12 refers to Jerusalem/Zion. However Isa 52:13-end refers to "my servant"

BRETHREN I KNOW YOU ALL MUST BE ITCHING TO RESPOND TO THIS OP BUT WISDOM SAYS DO NOT DO SO.

WHEN A MAN SEEKS TO RIDICULE AND POSES AS IF HE IS HONEST ONLY TO DRAW ATTENTION FROM YOU FOR A DEBATE IN FALSEHOOD THEN HE IS BEING DECEPTIVE.

MY HUMBLE ADVICE FOR BELIEVERS HERE IS TO KINDLY CEASE FROM RESPONDING TO POSTS OF THIS NATURE. HE IS BAITING YOU. HIS MIND IS ALREADY MADE UP AND YOU ARE JUST AN OBJECT OF MOCKERY FOR HIM.

GOD BLESS YOU AS YOU OBEY.

I am trudging slowly towards a very interesting revelation, but there are few stations I must stop at before I arrive at my destination. First, it's the station where I'll parse the authenticity of the story of jesus.

Now, who wrote the first four gospels? When were they written? Why were they canonized? These are questions christians themselves don't bother to ask, because they think the bible is historically factual. But is it?

The earliest of the canonical gospels is the gospel of Mark. And it was written around 70AD. This is 40 years after jesus died. Hmmm. Forty years is quite a long time. The other gospels of mathew, luke and john were written between 70 AD and 120 AD. What does this tell us? Could the writers have been actual followers of Jesus?

Well we can extrapolate from this, that the gospel of Mark was obviously the original text describing the life and death of Jesus, and the other writers of Mathew luke and John, copied and appended to it.
You can see proof of this by reading the four books of the gospel. Mark doesn't tell us about the birth of Jesus, neither does it tell us much about what happened after he died. That's why it's the smallest of all the books.

But how come the other books give us a description of Jesus' birth, and post death period? Was there a reason? Were their accounts factual? What was the underlying impetus? Let's find out.

tunene66:


Isa 52:1-12 refers to Jerusalem/Zion. However Isa 52:13-end refers to "my servant"

Please do your research. I don't want to dwell too long on this. "My servant" there was referring to the nation of Israel. Try to understand the context in which these verses were written. Consult any objective, reputable source.

GrizzlyBear:


Please do your research. I don't want to dwell too long on this. "My servant" there was referring to the nation of Israel. Consult any reputable source.

I don't agree. My servant in Isaiah 52 wasn't the nation Israel. It referred to the MESSIAH.

I don't need to do any research on this one at all at all

There's nothing honest about this thread. You're simply looking for an opportunity to start another round of useless wrangling that benefits no one.

If I were you, I'd rather devote more time to atheism and how you think in your head that the world will be better with it. I think this will be a more rewarding venture to you as a person, than meddling in what concerns you not.

tunene66:


I don't agree. My servant in Isaiah 52 wasn't the nation Israel. It referred to the MESSIAH.

I don't need to do any research on this one at all at all

YOU DO NOT NEED THIS ARGUMENT. PLS CEASE!

Hey Grizzlybear, would love to discuss with you but I am kinda busy at the moment. I love honest questions as these, so we can take it privately in a restricted thread. would mention you when I am ready.