FIVE SERIOUS PROBLEMS THAT ARE KEEPING ME AWAY FROM CHRISTIANITY.
1. Problem of "Jesus is God" and "Jesus is the Creator".

There is no way for the Trinitarian Christians to reconcile John 1:1,14 , Colossians 2:9 and Hebrew 1:8 etc (which proclaim that Jesus is God ) WITH Hosea 11:9/Malachi 3:6/Acts 2:22, John 17:3, John 20:17, John 14:28, John 14:1, Luke 6:12, Mark 10:18, Acts 3:13, Matthew 24:36 etc that dispute this claim.
Again, there is no way for the Non-trinitarian Christians like Jehovah Witnesses to reconcile John 1:3, 1st Corinthians 8:6 and Colossians 1:16 ( which proclaim that all things were created THROUGH Jesus Christ) WITH Isaiah 44:24, 48:13, 45:12 and 66:2 which declare that God created the heavens and the earth ALL ALONE, BY HIMSELF, BY HIS OWN HANDS AND NOBODY WAS WITH HIM.


2. Problem of "Jesus being sent ONLY to the Israelites
( check Matthew 15:24, 10:5-6, 19:28. Compare Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:15, Luke 24:47 and Acts 1:8 WITH Acts 10:1-28, 11:1-18,19, Galatians 2:7-9 and James 1:1).
Suppose you are being asked to distribute a packet of sweet to some children in your vicinity with an instruction to START WITH THE MALE CHILDREN BEFORE THE FEMALE. Now one of the female children approaches you for the collection of her own sweet. Please before God and man would you say; " I WAS ONLY ASKED TO GIVE THE MALE" ? Of course, you would not utter such kind of statement. You would definitely say "IT IS NOT YET TIME FOR THE FEMALE" or something similar to that .
Likewise, if it was already in the divine plan that JESUS AND HIS APOSTLES WOULD PREACH TO THE JEWS FIRST AND THEN LATER TO ALL THE GENTILES as the Christian scholars want us to believe, then Jesus' statement directed to that Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:24 should have been: IT IS NOT YET TIME FOR THE GENTILES or something similar in meaning rather than “I WAS SENT ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL(Matthew 15:24 NIV)”. Why did Jesus have to say such a statement if he was truly sent to the entire world to die for our salvation ?
Again, some of the Christian scholars opined that the reason why Jesus said he was sent ONLY to the Israelites was to TEST the faith of that Canaanite woman. But if this is the case, then Jesus would have committed an act of LYING by saying he was sent ONLY to the Israelites if TRULY he was sent to the entire world. So how could an esteem and beloved prophet of God like Jesus have committed an act of LYING for something that is very trivial ( just to test the faith of one woman) ? He could also have tested the faith of that woman WITHOUT LYING by simply say " It is not yet time for the Gentiles".
Therefore, no matter how you think about it; Matthew 15:24 will continue to be a problem for Christianity.


3. Problem of an innocent, righteous and beloved son who was placed under the CURSE of his own lovely and merciful father (Gal. 3:13, Deut. 21:23) in order for the father to forgive and ultimately save his sinful adopted children ( i:e the Christians) from his punishment.
Of course, it is totally IRRATIONAL for an innocent, righteous and beloved SON of a compassionate, lovely and merciful FATHER to be under the CURSE of the same father !!!
The God of the Bible, the alleged father of Jesus Christ, has been described in the same Bible as being compassionate, lovely and merciful ( See Psalm 78:38, 145:8-9, Luke 6:36, 1 John 4:8 etc ).
Similarly, Christians also agree that Jesus must be an innocent, righteous and beloved son .
Therefore, in order to avoid the IRRATIONALITY of putting such an innocent, righteous and beloved son under the CURSE of such a compassionate, lovely and merciful father, we have to conclude that Jesus did not die on the cross.
Even Paul knew very well that it is IRRATIONAL to believe that Jesus was ACCURSED by God. This is the reason why he contradicts himself by saying as follows;
"Therefore, I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus ACCURSED !” (1st Corinthians 12:3).
Yet the ONLY WAY for Jesus not to become "accursed" was for him NOT to die on the cross since it is clearly written in the the same Bible that ANYONE that is crucified is accursed by God (Deuteronomy 21:23, Galatians 3:13 ).


4. Problem of "Jesus' private appearance to Paul on the road to Damascus" NOT BEING FORETOLD to the original apostles: ( Compare Acts 22:6-9 WITH Matthew 24:23-28, Luke 10:18 . Compare Matthew 5:17-20, 23:1-3 With Romans 10:4, Colossians 2:14, Ephesians 2:15 and Galatians 3:23-25. Compare Genesis 17:9-14, Luke 2:21 With Galatians 5:2-4, Acts 23:12-14. Compare Acts 21:18-31 With Acts 26:1-8, 19-21, Romans 3:7. Compare Luke 12:1-2 with Acts 23:6. Compare 2 Corinthians 12:16 with Jeremiah 48:10)". Yet the same Paul wrote ALMOST HALF OF THE BOOKS that make up the New Testament . See the foundation upon which the edifice of Christianity is erected!


5 . Problem of " the Bible and Christianity not being endorsed by God " ; the words "Bible" and "Christianity" are no where to be found inside the Bible. Yet an exclusive divine book and a true faith from God MUST have a unique name given to it by God Himself for identification and to distinguish it from all other false faiths that exist on the earth. Not the name given to it by the people as in the case with the "Bible" and "Christianity" . Even the word "Christian" found in the Bible was neither COINED by God nor Jesus; not even by original apostles of Jesus in Jerusalem. But by Paul and his colleagues ; people that never met Jesus during his earthly ministry (check Acts 11:26).

Good points !!!

Let's wait for the scripture twisters aka apologists come and do their thing . i.e LYING ( )

Dump religion and their gods in the trash and save yourself the headache

frosbel2:
Good points !!!

Let's wait for the scripture twisters aka apologists come and do their thing . i.e LYING ( )

no no...they wont, this is way over them...

I'm also waiting for them..

Christianity is not the only faith on earth. If it is giving you headache, then consider all other faiths. But if you choose to believe that there is no any creator, then your headache has just started. This is because you are to solve the following problems associated with Atheism;


TWELVE MAJOR PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH ATHEISM/ NATURALISM
1.Lifeless and physical nature is BLIND, yet a creature that can SEE emerged from the same very nature.
2.Lifeless and physical nature is DEAF yet a creature that can HEAR emerged from the same very nature.
3. Lifeless and physical nature is DUMB, yet a creature that can TALK and SPEAK ( not only one or two languages but ) over SIX THOUSAND different languages emerged from the same very nature; a miraculous feature made mention in the Qur'an (Qur'an 30:22)
Just consider our ability to talk and speak in a COHERENT manner:
i. How are we able to select an appropriate word at a particular point in time from vast number of words stored in our brain during speech production?
ii. How does the brain even managed to store and retrieve those words?
iii . How does the the vocal apparatus ( which consist of the tongue,lips, teeth etc) managed to be informed within the shortest period of time regarding the words selected by the brain?
iv. How did this vocal apparatus managed to coordinate its activities to ensure the CORRECT PRONUNCIATION of those words?
v. How and why did present human species manage to have over SIX THOUSAND languages given that children ALWAYS speak the language they heard from their parents ?
vi. Are we to suppose that the FIRST human parents on earth were naturally BESTOWED with thousands of languages?
vii. How are we able to SWITCH voluntarily from one language to another during speech production?
viii. How are we able to PAUSE and then RESUME to speak voluntarily during speech production?
ix. How are we able to change the TONE of our voice voluntarily during speech production?
x. How are we able to increase or decrease voluntarily the LOUDNESS of our voice during speech production?
All these events are nothing but miracles. Any natural process can ONLY be based on CHANCE or follow some predetermined set of LAWS .
Therefore, if all activities going on in our brain is purely and ultimately determined by a natural process, the only instrument in an atheistic world, then the manner of our speech production will be based purely on chance or based on some predetermined set of laws. Under these conditions all the TEN events enumerated above would be absolutely IMPOSSIBLE as they obviously not based on chance or any strict predetermined set of law: They are are purely VOLUNTARY actions based on intensional decision.
4. Lifeless and physical nature is DEVOID of any form of intelligence, consciousness and memory; Yet the INTELLIGENCE, CONSCIOUSNESS and MEMORY require to establish and maintain complex and highly specific biological events observed in ASEXUAL (mitosis/meiosis) and SEXUAL REPRODUCTION emerged from the same very nature.
5. Lifeless and physical nature CANNOT MOVE VOLUNTARILY AND CONTROLLABLY yet a creature that CAN MOVE VOLUNTARILY AND CONTROLLABLY emerged from the same very nature.
6. Lifeless and physical nature CAN NOT EXPERIENCE ANY EMOTIONAL FEELINGS, yet a creature that CAN EXPERIENCE FEELINGS LIKE LOVE, HATRED, ANGER, HAPPINESS, SADNESS etc emerged from the same very nature.
7. Lifeless and physical nature CANNOT THINK yet , a creature that CAN THINK logically and formulate a rational argument emerged from the same very nature.
8. Lifeless and physical nature CAN NEITHER SLEEP NOR DREAM, yet a creature that CAN SLEEP AND DREAM emerged from the same very nature.
9. All the THIRTEEN VIABLE and FUNCTIONAL complex biological systems in human body which are physiologically and anatomically INTERDEPENDENT could ONLY have come into existence by intelligent and instantaneous CREATION rather than random and gradual EVOLUTION.
10. Lifeless and physical nature has NO KNOWLEDGE about ITSELF yet a creature that possesed EVERY ASPECT OF KNOWLEDGE about nature emerged from the same very nature.
11. Lifeless and physical nature was BROUGHT INTO EXISTENCE as evident from EXPANDING universe, HEAT DEATH PARADOX, CHEMICAL REACTIONS of substances and the FINITE number of PAST days and nights; Yet nothing can change itself or bring itself into existence. Therefore, an infinitely old SUPERNATURAL AGENT must exist to bring the present natural universe into existence.
12. The ONLY possible alternative to supernatural creation is natural evolution. However, the CONJUNCTION of naturalism with evolutionary theory is SELF-DEFEATING and undercut its own justification. If our faculty of "REASONING AND COGNITION i:e the process of knowing " ultimately originates from RANDOM and UNGUIDED activities of lifeless and physical nature, then this faculty CANNOT BE TRUSTED AND RELIED UPON. Under this condition, NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN BY CERTAINTY. Everything become DOUBTFUL. It is a conclusion that no one can conclude anything. Therefore, if we conclude that natural evolution is CERTAINLY true, then we have to conclude again that natural evolution is NOT CERTAINLY true. Hence, atheistic/natural evolution provides for itself an undefeated defeater. In other words, natural evolution is a self-defeating and self-contradictory theory. It is therefore UNACCEPTABLE and IRRATIONAL. The major reason behind this fact is that selective process in natural evolution can ONLY AIM for survival and reroduction; it CANNOT aim for TRUE knowledge or belief.
Besides, for natural evolution to create the species of male and female human beings with all their amazing features, THREE UNSURMOUNTABLE PROBLEMS listed below have to be solved;
i. Problem of creating the FIRST LIVING CELL from NON-LIVING materials ; The natural law of ENTROPY which ALWAYS cause the complex dead cells to DECAY and DISINTEGRATE into simpler lifeless particles would NEVER GIVE ROOM for any natural process which might tend to gradually BUILD the first functional and self-replicating living cell from such lifeless particles in the first instance. Here is the analogy; the natural law of gravitation which tends to cause the water to flow DOWN the hill can NEVER GIVE ROOM for any natural process which may tend to cause the water to flow UP the hill.
Therefore, the first living and self-replicating cell required to start the entire process of evolution could NOT have GRADUALLY and NATURALLY emerged from non living things. In fact, according to Wikipedia: " NO ONE has yet synthesized a proto cell using basic components which would have the necessary properties of life".
ii. Problem of creating the FIRST FUNCTIONAL MALE & FEMALE species from asexually reproducing organisms by random process.
iii. Problem of creating male & female HIGHER animal species from the male & female LOWER animal species by random process.
Due to these unsurmountable problems, natural evolution is impossible.
After the elimination of natural evolution, the only thing left to account for our existence is supernatural creation. Therefore, God the creator must exist

@OP,
Isa44:24, 45:12, 66:2,etc, the Supreme God is taking credit for His creative works., even though Jesus (Yahweh's 'firstbegotten ' son ,Heb1:6) worked under Him to create the universe (Heb1:1,2. Col1:15. 1cor11:3)

( The Boss always takes the credit since aeons of time, na the way.)

Jehovah (Yahweh) is the Almighty God (Ps83:18, Exodus 6:3)& the God of Jesus Christ. (John 20:17,30,31).

truthlover:
FIVE SERIOUS PROBLEMS THAT ARE KEEPING ME AWAY FROM CHRISTIANITY.
1. Problem of "Jesus is God" and "Jesus is the Creator".

There is no way for the Trinitarian Christians to reconcile John 1:1,14 , Colossians 2:9 and Hebrew 1:8 etc (which proclaim that Jesus is God ) WITH Hosea 11:9/Malachi 3:6/Acts 2:22, John 17:3, John 20:17, John 14:28, John 14:1, Luke 6:12, Mark 10:18, Acts 3:13, Matthew 24:36 etc that dispute this claim.
Again, there is no way for the Non-trinitarian Christians like Jehovah Witnesses to reconcile John 1:3, 1st Corinthians 8:6 and Colossians 1:16 ( which proclaim that all things were created THROUGH Jesus Christ) WITH Isaiah 44:24, 48:13, 45:12 and 66:2 which declare that God created the heavens and the earth ALL ALONE, BY HIMSELF, BY HIS OWN HANDS AND NOBODY WAS WITH HIM.

God is not Man. Jesus is BOTH God and Man. God did not change in His fundamental nature to become Man. Rather, He also took on the nature of Man so that in One Person God and Man are united.

truthlover:
2. Problem of "Jesus being sent ONLY to the Israelites
( check Matthew 15:24, 10:5-6, 19:28. Compare Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:15, Luke 24:47 and Acts 1:8 WITH Acts 10:1-28, 11:1-18,19, Galatians 2:7-9 and James 1:1).
Suppose you are being asked to distribute a packet of sweet to some children in your vicinity with an instruction to START WITH THE MALE CHILDREN BEFORE THE FEMALE. Now one of the female children approaches you for the collection of her own sweet. Please before God and man would you say; " I WAS ONLY ASKED TO GIVE THE MALE" ? Of course, you would not utter such kind of statement. You would definitely say "IT IS NOT YET TIME FOR THE FEMALE" or something similar to that .
Likewise, if it was already in the divine plan that JESUS AND HIS APOSTLES WOULD PREACH TO THE JEWS FIRST AND THEN LATER TO ALL THE GENTILES as the Christian scholars want us to believe, then Jesus' statement directed to that Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:24 should have been: IT IS NOT YET TIME FOR THE GENTILES or something similar in meaning rather than “I WAS SENT ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL(Matthew 15:24 NIV)”. Why did Jesus have to say such a statement if he was truly sent to the entire world to die for our salvation ?
Again, some of the Christian scholars opined that the reason why Jesus said he was sent ONLY to the Israelites was to TEST the faith of that Canaanite woman. But if this is the case, then Jesus would have committed an act of LYING by saying he was sent ONLY to the Israelites if TRULY he was sent to the entire world. So how could an esteem and beloved prophet of God like Jesus have committed an act of LYING for something that is very trivial ( just to test the faith of one woman) ? He could also have tested the faith of that woman WITHOUT LYING by simply say " It is not yet time for the Gentiles".
Therefore, no matter how you think about it; Matthew 15:24 will continue to be a problem for Christianity.

He was sent to Israel only because Israel was God's channel for blessing the whole world.

truthlover:
3. Problem of an innocent, righteous and beloved son who was placed under the CURSE of his own lovely and merciful father (Gal. 3:13, Deut. 21:23) in order for the father to forgive and ultimately save his sinful adopted children ( i:e the Christians) from his punishment.
Of course, it is totally IRRATIONAL for an innocent, righteous and beloved SON of a compassionate, lovely and merciful FATHER to be under the CURSE of the same father !!!
The God of the Bible, the alleged father of Jesus Christ, has been described in the same Bible as being compassionate, lovely and merciful ( See Psalm 78:38, 145:8-9, Luke 6:36, 1 John 4:8 etc ).
Similarly, Christians also agree that Jesus must be an innocent, righteous and beloved son .
Therefore, in order to avoid the IRRATIONALITY of putting such an innocent, righteous and beloved son under the CURSE of such a compassionate, lovely and merciful father, we have to conclude that Jesus did not die on the cross.
Even Paul knew very well that it is IRRATIONAL to believe that Jesus was ACCURSED by God. This is the reason why he contradicts himself by saying as follows;
"Therefore, I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus ACCURSED !” (1st Corinthians 12:3).
Yet the ONLY WAY for Jesus not to become "accursed" was for him NOT to die on the cross since it is clearly written in the the same Bible that ANYONE that is crucified is accursed by God (Deuteronomy 21:23, Galatians 3:13 ).

But it is not irrational for a father to work himself to the bone to feed his children and provide for them even at an age when they could do so for themselves. Nor is it irrational for able-bodied men to put their lives at risk for other people in war as soldiers.

The Lord Jesus was perfectly righteous and never did anything wrong. But on the Cross, He willingly took on the full weight of all human sin in His Body and became sin so that all of God's Anger against sin would be vented on Him. He did not personally deserve it but once He took our position, He made Himself fully deserving of it. That was His Ultimate Righteous Act - dying for those who do not deserve it.

truthlover:
4. Problem of "Jesus' private appearance to Paul on the road to Damascus" NOT BEING FORETOLD to the original apostles: ( Compare Acts 22:6-9 WITH Matthew 24:23-28, Luke 10:18 . Compare Matthew 5:17-20, 23:1-3 With Romans 10:4, Colossians 2:14, Ephesians 2:15 and Galatians 3:23-25. Compare Genesis 17:9-14, Luke 2:21 With Galatians 5:2-4, Acts 23:12-14. Compare Acts 21:18-31 With Acts 26:1-8, 19-21, Romans 3:7. Compare Luke 12:1-2 with Acts 23:6. Compare 2 Corinthians 12:16 with Jeremiah 48:10)". Yet the same Paul wrote ALMOST HALF OF THE BOOKS that make up the New Testament . See the foundation upon which the edifice of Christianity is erected!

I'm not sure what this means exactly. I can't see the connection between your objections and the passages you provided. So, explain a little more.

Did Jesus need to tell His disciples that He would appear to Paul later? Why did He?

Was Paul disqualified in some way from writing Scripture? How was he?

truthlover:
5 . Problem of " the Bible and Christianity not being endorsed by God " ; the words "Bible" and "Christianity" are no where to be found inside the Bible. Yet an exclusive divine book and a true faith from God MUST have a unique name given to it by God Himself for identification and to distinguish it from all other false faiths that exist on the earth. Not the name given to it by the people as in the case with the "Bible" and "Christianity" . Even the word "Christian" found in the Bible was neither COINED by God nor Jesus; not even by original apostles of Jesus in Jerusalem. But by Paul and his colleagues ; people that never met Jesus during his earthly ministry (check Acts 11:26).

This one seems very frivolous to me. Until Jesus Christ was born, nobody knew that His Name would be Jesus although prophecies about His Coming began right at the beginning of human history.

"Bible" is just a term of convenience. You can say "Scripture" or "Scriptures" if you prefer. Those ones are in the Bible. As for "Christian", it too is a term of convenience. Before the mockery that eventually became the name, we were called disciples, followers of "this Way", brethren, children of God (as we still are called), saints, believers etc. We simply accepted a mockery and by so doing redefined it.

Obviously too, it wasn't Paul who coined the term. In fact, he never used it. It was unbelievers who called believers Christians first in Antioch. In fact, the actual term they used was "Chrestians". Its modern equivalent would be "Goody Two Shoes" "Holy-Holy" "Holier-than-thou" etc. It was a mockery for the moral behavior of Christians. In time, it was corrupted to Christians which meant "(members) of the House of Christ". Peter is the only believer in the Bible to use the term at all.

1. Jesus was sent to Israel... while he sent the disciples to the world.. John saw him and said... "Behold the lamb of God who took away the sins of the world... "

This is not a problem at all. God designed it this way...God had said that through Abraham, the nations of the world will be blessed....

God mentioned in the Old Testament that Israel would be a kingdom of priests to the rest of the world..Priests preach, that's what they do. Israel was called first, to call others.

The disciples were called... they became priests and called the rest of the world..

2. Jesus is God... The word of God became flesh...

3. Jesus mentioned in the book of John that he WILLINGLY decided to lay down his life... That's why the father loves him so much....

It was not impossed on him... He took up the work of salvation knowing what was involved...

4. This point is very funny and feeble... Must Jesus told the disciples "I am going to appear to Paul oooo"?

Peter mentioned the teachings of Paul in his book... He sanctioned it... I don't know why Paul's experience on the road to Damascus is a problem. ...

A Bible scholar would know that the teaching of Paul are extracts from teaching of Jesus and Old Testament books.. It is very easy to see this...

Remove the books of Paul and you have the four gospel... These four books hold the foundation of the faith in Christianity.

Christianity is based therefore on the teachings of Jesus.

5. Really? The word... Christianity is "Christ like"

...and the people of Antioch used the word.. "Christians " when they saw the life of the apostles and noticed the resemblance to the life of Jesus...

The word.... Christianity was coined from it...

Christianity involves everything Jesus preached... Sin, repentance, salvation, sanctification, concentration and fellowship with God... There is no difference...

So? The fact that it doesn't appear in the Bible has nothing to do with anything..

I don't even know what to say about your point on the issue of "Bible " not appearing in the Bible.

One would easily see that those points are coming from a zealous Muslim... I tell you...

Either the OP copied it from a site and dumped it here, or he as a very zealous Muslim developed it.

I have had encounters with them... and I know how they look for lame points to discredit Christianity...

One of them once said that Jesus asked the disciples who he was because he was not even sure of himself..

smh*

1.Hypostatic union loosely states;
"Within the person of Jesus Christ, there were two natures : Divine and Human" .
This is impossible. The person of Jesus Christ as proposed by Christian theism can not exist. The reason why is because within the person of Jesus Christ, there are two CONTRADICTORY natures. God is by definition perfect, omniscient, omnipresent, all-wise, eternal, omnipotent, etc. Humans are by definition imperfect, ignorant, limited, not all-wise, mortal, impotent, etc. These two contradictory natures CANNOT CO-EXIST in one person for one reason :
They are contradictory and violate the law of non-contradiction. For example, Does the person of Jesus know everything? If no, then he does not have the omniscient nature of God (Matthew 24:36). If yes then he does not have the ignorant nature of humans and he is not really human. Is the person of Jesus Christ perfect? If No, then he does not really have the God nature. If yes, then he does not really have the imperfect human nature (Ecclesiastes 7:20). Is the person of Jesus Christ all-powerful? If yes, then he is not really human (Mark 14:38). If no, then he does not really have the God nature (Psalms 115:3). You can not be both God And Human in one person.

2. Jesus did not send his apostles to preach to the world. Follow the evidence below
" I was sent ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL(Matthew 15:24)"
“Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL(Matthew 10:5-6)"
"Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the TWELVE TRIBES OF ISRAEL(Matthew 19:28)"
It is crystal clear from all these verses that Jesus and his apostles were sent ONLY to the Israelites i:e the Jews.
However, Christians usually proclaim that command of NOT preaching to the Gentiles was later cancelled and replaced by the new command of preaching to all the nations of the world just before Jesus ascended to heaven as the verse below indicate;
" Therefore go and make disciples of ALL NATIONS, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19 )".
In this very verse, Jesus asked the apostles to carry out TWO great assignments;
1.To preach to all the nations of the world.
2.To baptize the people in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy spirit
But AFTER Jesus'departure, did apostles and the other disciples under their authority really act on these two commands ?
The following verses show that the apostles and the other disciples did not carry out the first command. In fact, they find it very difficult to visit the Gentiles talkless of preaching to them. See the evidence below;
Acts 10:28 NIV: Peter said to them (i:e some of the Gentiles that asked Peter to come ): “You are well aware that it is AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE. But God has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean".
Acts 11:2-3 NLT: "But when Peter arrived back in Jerusalem, THE JEWISH BELIEVERS CRITICIZED HIM; “YOU ENTERED THE HOME OF THE GENTILES AND EVEN ATE WITH THEM!”
The fact that other Jewish believers in Christ criticized Peter on his arrival back to Jerusalem ON THE SAME ISSUE OF VISITING AND ASSOCIATING WITH GENTILES help us to know that Peter knew what he was saying when he said "YOU ARE WELL AWARE THAT IT IS AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE. (Acts 10:28).

Acts 11:19 NKJV: "Now those who were scattered after the persecution that arose over Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, PREACHING THE WORD TO NO ONE BUT THE JEWS ONLY".
Galatians 2:7-9 NLT: "Instead, they saw that God had given me( Paul) the responsibility of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as he had given Peter the responsibility of PREACHING TO THE JEWS. For the same God who worked through Peter as the APOSTLE TO THE JEWS also worked through me(Paul) as the apostle to the Gentiles. In fact, James, Peter, and John, who were known as pillars of the church, recognized the gift God had given me, and they accepted Barnabas and me as their co-workers. They encouraged us to keep preaching to the Gentiles, WHILE THEY CONTINUED THEIR WORKS WITH THE JEWS."
Have you now seen that original apostles of Jesus did NOT really act on the first command of preaching to all the nations. The work of christianizing the Gentiles was MAJORLY carried out by Paul and his colleagues; not by the original apostles of Jesus Christ who spent most of their time in Jerusalem.
Some Christians want to argue that the reason why Peter said:"YOU ARE WELL AWARE THAT IT IS AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE(Acts 10:28)" is because Peter and other apostles find it difficult to discard the Jewish custom of not associating and visiting the Gentiles. However,the fact that Peter responded positively to that VISION and departed with those gentiles on the following day (see Acts 10:29) is an evidence that he never find it difficult to discard this Jewish custom. Again, it is not possible for the apostles and disciples of Jesus to give PREFERENCE for mere Jewish custom OVER a great and important command from their Master.
What actually preventing them was the command of "NOT PREACHING TO THE GENTILES" in Matthew 10:5-6 and the fact that Jesus told them CATEGORICALLY that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of the house of Israel( Matthew15:24).

What about the second command of baptizing in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy spirit ?
Again, see the evidence against this command;
Then peter said to them, repent, and let everyone of you be baptized in the NAME OF JESUS CHRIST for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38).
For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the NAME OF THE LORD JESUS (Acts 8:16).
So peter ordered them to be baptized in the NAME OF JESUS the Messiah. Then they asked him to stay there for three days (Acts 10:48).
If “Matthew 28:19” is true and Jesus did command his apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, then why would apostles go against this command and baptize only in Jesus name ?

As you can see, the original apostles of Jesus did NOT act on the two great commands contained in Matthew 28:19.
Do you know the reason why ?
Matthew 28:19 and other verses like it DID NOT EVER COME OUT from Jesus'mouth.

3. The case of soldiers risking their lives on the battle field in order to save the lives of others from THE ENEMY is TOTALLY DIFFERENT from the case of a father who insist that his only righteous and beloved son MUST BE ACCURSED before he can forgive and ultimately save his adopted children from his OWN punishment; NOT from the punishment of the ENEMY.

Even if the son voluntarily decided to take up the CURSE, the father has every right to reject the offer because
it is totally IRRATIONAL for an innocent, righteous and beloved SON of a compassionate, lovely and merciful FATHER to be under the CURSE of the same father !!!
The God of the Bible, the alleged father of Jesus Christ, has been described in the same Bible as being compassionate, lovely and merciful ( See Psalm 78:38, 145:8-9, Luke 6:36, 1 John 4:8 etc ).
Simiarly, Christians also agree that Jesus must be an innocent, righteous and beloved son .
Therefore, in order to avoid the IRRATIONALITY of putting such an innocent, righteous and beloved son under the CURSE of such a compassionate, lovely and merciful father, the conclusion that "Jesus did NOT die on the cross for our sins" must be perfectly true.
Even Paul knew very well that it is IRRATIONAL to believe that Jesus was ACCURSED by God. This is the reason why he contradicts himself by saying as follows;
"Therefore I want you to understand that NO ONE speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed !” (1st Corinthians 12:3)
Yet the ONLY WAY for Jesus not to become "accursed" by God was for him NOT to die on the cross since it is clearly written in the the same Bible that ANYONE that is crucified is accursed by God (Deuteronomy 21:23, Galatians 3:13 ).

4. It is VERY IMPORTANT for Jesus to foretell his appearance to Paul on the road to Damascus to the originnal apostles . See the reason below;
Before his ascension to heaven, Jesus said to his apostles ;
"Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying; I am the Christ; and shall deceive many (Matthew 24:4-5)…“Then if anyone says here is Christ or there, DO NOT BELIEVE IT. For false christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possiblye, even the elect. See, I have told you ahead of time. So if anyone tells you; Christ is out in the wilderness, do not go out; or Christ is in the inner rooms, DO NOT BELIEVE IT. For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the son of Man. Wherever there is a carcass, then the vultures will gather(Matthew 24:23-28)”.
In these verses, we are commanded by Jesus not to believe any account of a person who claims to have seen Jesus in a private manner prior to his universally-visible appearance to all . Jesus was telling us that his returning to earth again from heaven will be clear and unmistakable to everyone. Every eye from every point “east and west” will see him. The people would gather to see Jesus coming from the heaven just like vultures gather over the carcass. Hence, any private appearances of Jesus before this public appearance should be discarded .Therefore, if Jesus’ private appearance to Paul in form of “a great light falling from heaven” would be an exception to this great warning of not believing in private appearances of Christ, then Jesus should have foretold this exceptional event to the original apostles before he ascended to heaven. But Jesus did not foretell anything like that. Instead of pre-informing the original apostles that he would privately appear to someone like “LIGHTNING FROM HEAVEN” before his universally-visible appearance to all, Jesus only informed them as follows;“I saw Satan falling like LIGHTNING FROM HEAVEN (Luke10:18)”.See how all evidence is working seriously against Paul! But is it really reasonable to believe that it was Satan, and not Jesus, that revealed himself to Paul in form of lightning from heaven? Yes, it is not only reasonable but also probable because as at that time Paul was yet to repent from all the evil crimes he has committed against the true followers of Christ (Acts 9:1, 26:11). In fact, his spiritual condition was so bad(1st Timothy 1:13) for anyone to be sure that he possessed nothing of divine power and divine wisdom that could have protected him from such satanic delusion. If the great light that appear to Paul was true Jesus Christ, then one would expect Jesus to command him to repent immediately and secretly meet the original apostles of Jesus who were then living at Jerusalem. On the contrary, Paul even continued to boast and proclaimed that these original apostles of Jesus imparted nothing to him (Galatians 2:6).

truthlover:
1.Hypostatic union loosely states;
"Within the person of Jesus Christ, there were two natures : Divine and Human" .
This is impossible. The person of Jesus Christ as proposed by Christian theism can not exist. The reason why is because within the person of Jesus Christ, there are two CONTRADICTORY natures. God is by definition perfect, omniscient, omnipresent, all-wise, eternal, omnipotent, etc. Humans are by definition imperfect, ignorant, limited, not all-wise, mortal, impotent, etc. These two contradictory natures CANNOT CO-EXIST in one person for one reason :
They are contradictory and violate the law of non-contradiction. For example, Does the person of Jesus know everything? If no, then he does not have the omniscient nature of God (Matthew 24:36). If yes then he does not have the ignorant nature of humans and he is not really human. Is the person of Jesus Christ perfect? If No, then he does not really have the God nature. If yes, then he does not really have the imperfect human nature (Ecclesiastes 7:20). Is the person of Jesus Christ all-powerful? If yes, then he is not really human (Mark 14:38). If no, then he does not really have the God nature (Psalms 115:3). You can not be both God And Human in one person.

You have the wrong conception of contradiction. Things are not contradictory unless they negate each other. When they do not, they are merely different. For example, light is different from darkness and contradicts it since where there is light, there can be no darkness. And if darkness prevails in a certain place, then there is no light there either. But green and blue are different and non-contradictory. Green is very clearly not blue. But green can be part of a color mix with blue without negating blue.

In the same vein, the human nature is incalculably inferior to the divine but it does not contradict it. The divine nature is simply infinitely greater than the human. This is why the Bible makes a very emphatic point about the great Sacrifice of God the Word in becoming human. It actually describes that as "voiding" Himself of His Divinity in Philippians 2:7. The Greek word translated there as "made Himself nothing" or "emptied Himself" is the one from which there theological term "Kenosis" was developed. It describes how in His First Advent, the Lord Jesus made Himself able to live like a true human without any of the advantages of His Deity. He did not cease even then to be Deity. He just never actually used that "part" of Himself until after He resurrected and was glorified and kenosis ended.

Another way to look at what He did is to imagine a King who changes out of his royal robes and divests himself of all symbols of his authority and dons the apparel of a peasant and goes to walk among the poor in his land. Unless he is recognized and permits it to be otherwise, he will be treated just like any other peasant. But he does not cease to be king. This is not a perfect parallel but it is close enough to help here.

In conclusion, there was no contradiction.

truthlover:
2. Jesus did not send his apostles to preach to the world. Follow the evidence below
" I was sent ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL(Matthew 15:24)"
“Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL(Matthew 10:5-6)"
"Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the TWELVE TRIBES OF ISRAEL(Matthew 19:28)"
It is crystal clear from all these verses that Jesus and his apostles were sent ONLY to the Israelites i:e the Jews.
However, Christians usually proclaim that command of NOT preaching to the Gentiles was later cancelled and replaced by the new command of preaching to all the nations of the world just before Jesus ascended to heaven as the verse below indicate;
" Therefore go and make disciples of ALL NATIONS, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19 )".
In this very verse, Jesus asked the apostles to carry out TWO great assignments;
1.To preach to all the nations of the world.
2.To baptize the people in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy spirit
But AFTER Jesus'departure, did apostles and the other disciples under their authority really act on these two commands ?
The following verses show that the apostles and the other disciples did not carry out the first command. In fact, they find it very difficult to visit the Gentiles talkless of preaching to them. See the evidence below;
Acts 10:28 NIV: Peter said to them (i:e some of the Gentiles that asked Peter to come ): “You are well aware that it is AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE. But God has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean".
Acts 11:2-3 NLT: "But when Peter arrived back in Jerusalem, THE JEWISH BELIEVERS CRITICIZED HIM; “YOU ENTERED THE HOME OF THE GENTILES AND EVEN ATE WITH THEM!”
The fact that other Jewish believers in Christ criticized Peter on his arrival back to Jerusalem ON THE SAME ISSUE OF VISITING AND ASSOCIATING WITH GENTILES help us to know that Peter knew what he was saying when he said "YOU ARE WELL AWARE THAT IT IS AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE. (Acts 10:28).

Acts 11:19 NKJV: "Now those who were scattered after the persecution that arose over Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, PREACHING THE WORD TO NO ONE BUT THE JEWS ONLY".
Galatians 2:7-9 NLT: "Instead, they saw that God had given me( Paul) the responsibility of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as he had given Peter the responsibility of PREACHING TO THE JEWS. For the same God who worked through Peter as the APOSTLE TO THE JEWS also worked through me(Paul) as the apostle to the Gentiles. In fact, James, Peter, and John, who were known as pillars of the church, recognized the gift God had given me, and they accepted Barnabas and me as their co-workers. They encouraged us to keep preaching to the Gentiles, WHILE THEY CONTINUED THEIR WORKS WITH THE JEWS."
Have you now seen that original apostles of Jesus did NOT really act on the first command of preaching to all the nations. The work of christianizing the Gentiles was MAJORLY carried out by Paul and his colleagues; not by the original apostles of Jesus Christ who spent most of their time in Jerusalem.
Some Christians want to argue that the reason why Peter said:"YOU ARE WELL AWARE THAT IT IS AGAINST OUR LAW FOR A JEW TO ASSOCIATE WITH OR VISIT A GENTILE(Acts 10:28)" is because Peter and other apostles find it difficult to discard the Jewish custom of not associating and visiting the Gentiles. However,the fact that Peter responded positively to that VISION and departed with those gentiles on the following day (see Acts 10:29) is an evidence that he never find it difficult to discard this Jewish custom. Again, it is not possible for the apostles and disciples of Jesus to give PREFERENCE for mere Jewish custom OVER a great and important command from their Master.
What actually preventing them was the command of "NOT PREACHING TO THE GENTILES" in Matthew 10:5-6 and the fact that Jesus told them CATEGORICALLY that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of the house of Israel( Matthew15:24).

What about the second command of baptizing in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy spirit ?
Again, see the evidence against this command;
Then peter said to them, repent, and let everyone of you be baptized in the NAME OF JESUS CHRIST for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38).
For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the NAME OF THE LORD JESUS (Acts 8:16).
So peter ordered them to be baptized in the NAME OF JESUS the Messiah. Then they asked him to stay there for three days (Acts 10:48).
If “Matthew 28:19” is true and Jesus did command his apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, then why would apostles go against this command and baptize only in Jesus name ?

As you can see, the original apostles of Jesus did NOT act on the two great commands contained in Matthew 28:19.
Do you know the reason why ?
Matthew 28:19 and other verses like it DID NOT EVER COME OUT from Jesus'mouth.

Depending on the quality of your next response, it is very likely that I will not respond any further on this thread because the above suggests very strongly to me that you are intent on being dishonest perhaps in order to swindle Christians out of their faith and I cannot see how I will be able to discuss amicably with you in that spirit.

First, it is perfectly obvious from your own comment that Jesus DID IN FACT send His apostles and disciples to the rest of the world.

Second, it is perfectly obvious that these apostles and disciples DID IN FACT go to the rest of the world. Whether they did so reluctantly or enthusiastically, they DID GO IN FACT. And, if they did not go, it would not have changed the fact that the Lord Jesus sent them thereby confirming that while He was sent to the Jews and so were they during His earthly ministry, the goal in the end was for what Israel had been offered to spread to all the world.

Third, Paul's work only means that he was more enthusiastic about the Lord Jesus's commands than all the others were. That can hardly be a fault on his part. Would that all of us were.

Fourth, in Jesus Christ Himself, the fullness of God dwells bodily, so that baptism into Jesus Christ is baptism into the Trinity as a whole. There was no contradiction between what Peter said and what the Lord Jesus commanded.

Fifth, it is entirely your own fabrication that Matthew 28:19 is not part of the Bible. Obviously, as demonstrated above, it very much is. Furthermore, from Abraham through all the generations of Israel, it was constantly emphasized that God would bless the whole world through Israel, so there is no reason at all to imagine that the Lord Jesus was not intending to save the whole world or to have the Gospel preached all over the world. In fact, in the incident in the house of Simon the Pharisee, He announced that the story of the woman who broke an expensive box of perfume for Him would be told wherever the Gospel is proclaimed throughout the world.

truthlover:
3. The case of soldiers risking their lives on the battle field in order to save the lives of others from THE ENEMY is TOTALLY DIFFERENT from the case of a father who insist that his only righteous and beloved son MUST BE ACCURSED before he can forgive and ultimately save his adopted children from his OWN punishment; NOT from the punishment of the ENEMY.

Even if the son voluntarily decided to take up the CURSE, the father has every right to reject the offer because
it is totally IRRATIONAL for an innocent, righteous and beloved SON of a compassionate, lovely and merciful FATHER to be under the CURSE of the same father !!!
The God of the Bible, the alleged father of Jesus Christ, has been described in the same Bible as being compassionate, lovely and merciful ( See Psalm 78:38, 145:8-9, Luke 6:36, 1 John 4:8 etc ).
Simiarly, Christians also agree that Jesus must be an innocent, righteous and beloved son .
Therefore, in order to avoid the IRRATIONALITY of putting such an innocent, righteous and beloved son under the CURSE of such a compassionate, lovely and merciful father, the conclusion that "Jesus did NOT die on the cross for our sins" must be perfectly true.
Even Paul knew very well that it is IRRATIONAL to believe that Jesus was ACCURSED by God. This is the reason why he contradicts himself by saying as follows;
"Therefore I want you to understand that NO ONE speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed !” (1st Corinthians 12:3)
Yet the ONLY WAY for Jesus not to become "accursed" by God was for him NOT to die on the cross since it is clearly written in the the same Bible that ANYONE that is crucified is accursed by God (Deuteronomy 21:23, Galatians 3:13 ).

First, you offer no reason for why it is more rational for able-bodied men to go into battle and risk their lives for other people some of whom would be incredibly ungrateful for the sacrifice than for the Lord Jesus to sacrifice Himself for the sins of the world. So, I see no reason to accept this nebulous difference you insist on.

Second, obviously, there was no insistence on the Father's Part. The Father told the Lord Jesus to lay down His Life only willingly and take it up in a similar manner.

Third, God's Love means that He must protect that which He loves. His Justice means that He must not let any wrong-doing go unpunished or any righteousness go unrewarded. His compassion and mercy mean that He pities the weak and delivers them. Therefore, these things are consistent with His Offer of His One and Only Son to die in our behalf so that we are not destroyed for our sin. If His Son was willing, then He was going to take all of our sin and become responsible for it so that He would suffer the full punishment for sin to deliver us who were too weak to deliver our own selves. And because of this righteous act, His Son too is raised from the dead and given all authority over all creation as well as the Church and all Millennial Believers as His Reward. Thus, God's Love, Justice, Compassion, Righteousness and Mercy are all fully served with none left wanting at all. The Lord Jesus was not made the Sacrifice against His Will. And He was not left suffering forever for our sins.

truthlover:
4. It is VERY IMPORTANT for Jesus to foretell his appearance to Paul on the road to Damascus to the originnal apostles . See the reason below;
Before his ascension to heaven, Jesus said to his apostles ;
"Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying; I am the Christ; and shall deceive many (Matthew 24:4-5)…“Then if anyone says here is Christ or there, DO NOT BELIEVE IT. For false christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possiblye, even the elect. See, I have told you ahead of time. So if anyone tells you; Christ is out in the wilderness, do not go out; or Christ is in the inner rooms, DO NOT BELIEVE IT. For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the son of Man. Wherever there is a carcass, then the vultures will gather(Matthew 24:23-28)”.
In these verses, we are commanded by Jesus not to believe any account of a person who claims to have seen Jesus in a private manner prior to his universally-visible appearance to all . Jesus was telling us that his returning to earth again from heaven will be clear and unmistakable to everyone. Every eye from every point “east and west” will see him. The people would gather to see Jesus coming from the heaven just like vultures gather over the carcass. Hence, any private appearances of Jesus before this public appearance should be discarded .Therefore, if Jesus’ private appearance to Paul in form of “a great light falling from heaven” would be an exception to this great warning of not believing in private appearances of Christ, then Jesus should have foretold this exceptional event to the original apostles before he ascended to heaven. But Jesus did not foretell anything like that. Instead of pre-informing the original apostles that he would privately appear to someone like “LIGHTNING FROM HEAVEN” before his universally-visible appearance to all, Jesus only informed them as follows;“I saw Satan falling like LIGHTNING FROM HEAVEN (Luke10:18)”.See how all evidence is working seriously against Paul! But is it really reasonable to believe that it was Satan, and not Jesus, that revealed himself to Paul in form of lightning from heaven? Yes, it is not only reasonable but also probable because as at that time Paul was yet to repent from all the evil crimes he has committed against the true followers of Christ (Acts 9:1, 26:11). In fact, his spiritual condition was so bad(1st Timothy 1:13) for anyone to be sure that he possessed nothing of divine power and divine wisdom that could have protected him from such satanic delusion. If the great light that appear to Paul was true Jesus Christ, then one would expect Jesus to command him to repent immediately and secretly meet the original apostles of Jesus who were then living at Jerusalem. On the contrary, Paul even continued to boast and proclaimed that these original apostles of Jesus imparted nothing to him (Galatians 2:6).

Your argument is false simply because Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 all teach that the Lord Jesus was answering an eschatological question. That is, He was prophesying about the last few (seven, in fact) years before His Return to rule the world. Of course, even Stephen saw a vision of the Lord Jesus after this and nobody accuses him of being a false Christ, false prophet, false teacher or false believer.

Paul, on the other hand, was the 12th apostle chosen by the Lord Jesus to replace Judas Iscariot. The vote cast by the disciples before the Holy Spirit was given to the Church at Pentecost was not sanctified by the Lord, so Matthias was never the replacement.

Paul was chosen by the same Lord Jesus Who handpicked each apostle. No other apostle was voted into the office of the apostle. This is why he was granted to see the glorified Lord Jesus in his turn.

1. Let me try to explain it again for the last time;
Yes blue and green are different but not contradictory. But God's nature and human nature are not only different but also contradictory. For example, it is very clear that human being is NOT omnipresent. But God is omnipresent (Jeremiah 23:23-24). Therefore, this very unlimited nature of God directly CONTRADICT the limited nature of human being. Hence, these two contradictory natures cannot CO-EXIST SIDE BY SIDE in one person; one has to vacate for the other to stay . And if the two natures were to BLEND with each other, then this will lead to CHANGE and yet God's nature cannot be changed (Malachi 3:6). For this very reason, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Jesus to be both human and God at the same time.
In fact, when Jesus was praying to the Father, he said; "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the ONLY TRUE God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent (John 17:3)" . If Jesus himself was referring to another person (i:e the Father) as the "ONLY true God" , then how could Jesus be God ? If Jesus did not use the word "ONLY", then hopefully the Christians may still want to argue that Jesus is also God just like his Father. However, the phrase "ONLY TRUE God" used by Jesus in reference to the father alone implies that apart from the father all others are FAKE.

2. I have given you sufficient evidence (Acts 10:28, 11:2-3, 19, Galatians 2:7-9, James 1:1, Acts 2:38, 8:16 and 10:48) to show that apostles of Jesus did NOT carry out the two great commands contained in Matthew 28:19. Now if you insist that this Matthew 28:19 actually came out from Jesus' mouth, then you have to believe that God has chosen the WRONG PEOPLE to be the apostles of Jesus; the apostles who neglected the commands from their master.
3. It is very RATIONAL both in the sight of God and men for some one to risk his own life in an attempt to save the lives of others from the harm of the ENEMY. However, if there is alternative and easier way you can take to save the lives of others from the harm of the ENEMY or from the harm of YOUR OWN SELF, then it is highly IRRATIONAL for such a person to risk his own life or the life of his close relative.
You wrote that Justice of God means that He must not let any wrong-doing go unpunished.
But an act of wrong-doing is not a "TANGIBLE SUBSTANCE" you can just transfer from one guilty person to another innocent person. It is absolutely INSEPERABLE from the person that committed the act. For example, there is NO WAY you can punish the act of fornication WITHOUT punishing the fornicators. There is NO WAY you can punish the act of theft WITHOUT punishing the theives. Therefore, if the act of wrong-doing must always be punished as you claim , then it is the very people which committed the act that must be punished; not an innocent and righteous person. See the evidence directly from God's mouth;
"The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. But if a wicked man TURNS (i:e REPENTS) from all his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. NONE OF THE TRANSGRESSIONS which he has committed shall be remembered against him; Because of the RIGHTEOUSNESS which he has done, HE SHALL LIVE. Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?” says the Lord God, “and not that he should TURN FROM HIS WAYS AND LIVE ? (Ezekiel 18:20-23).
As you can see from above, "repentance from our sinful deeds and engaging in the act of righteousness " is what we need to be saved. This is the rational and alternative way that God has chosen to ensure our salvation. THERE IS NO NEED FOR an innocent and righteous son to fall under the CURSE of his own lovely and merciful father before we can be saved.

4. However, the fact that Paul contradicts true Jesus on many important issues is even enough to prove that the revelation he claimed to receive was from fake Jesus Christ. For example, God and Jesus forbid the believers from eating spiritually unclean foods and meat sacrificed to idols (Ezekiel 22:26, Revelation 2:14) but Paul wrote that there is nothing wrong in eating such things as long as you do not eat them in the presence of a weak believer(1st Corinthians 8:8-10, Colossians 2:16).Again, Jesus’ statement in Matthew 24:24 and Matthew 7:21-23 implies that; performing great signs and wonders in Jesus’ name are the things that would accompany the false christs and the false prophets. Yet Paul declare that performing great signs and wonders in Jesus’ name are the things that even commissioned him as true apostle of Jesus Christ (2nd Corinthians 12:12, Romans 15:19). Furthermore, Jesus said: Do NOT THINK I CAME TO DESTROY THE LAW or the (way of the) PROPHETS. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19).

Yet Paul declares as follows: “Christ is the end of the Law (Romans 10:4).
But BEFORE faith came, we were KEPT UNDER GUARD BY THE LAW, kept for the faith which after-ward would be revealed. Therefore, THE LAW WAS OUR TUTOR to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But AFTER faith has come, WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER A TUTOR (Galatians 3:23-25).
Again, despite the fact that circumcision is an everlasting covenant of God for the Jews i:e the Israelites (Genesis 17:9-14) and Jesus himself was also circumcised (Luke 2:21); yet Paul went ahead to write as follows: “Indeed, I Paul say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to EVERY MAN who become circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged (i.e. cut off ) from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace(Galatians 5:2-4)”. The term “EVERY MAN” used by Paul in the verse quoted above is indisputable evidence that he condemned the act of circumcision for both Jews and Gentiles. If this is not the case, then the Jewish believers in the Jerusalem would not bound themselves with oath that they will never eat nor drink until they kill Paul (Acts 23:12-14). In fact, this single fact alone that Paul condemn the act of circumcision, an EVERLASTING covenant of God, is another prove that “the great light from heaven” that appeared to Paul on his road to Damascus was a false Christ as already foretold by Jesus Christ during his earthly ministry.
Furthermore, Bible recorded that the number of Jesus apostles was somehow fixed to be twelve (Matthew 10:2-7, 19:28, Revelation 21:14). Therefore, when Judas Iscariot fell out and there was need for replacement and restoration of original twelve, then one would expect the divine plan to unfold in such a way that original apostles would be pre-informed by Jesus to exercise patience and wait till Paul repents. But instead of waiting for Paul, Matthias was chosen to replace Judas under the guidance of Holy Spirit (Acts 1:20-26). This proves again that apostleship of Paul was not even recognized in heaven. Yet Paul repeatedly called himself an apostle of true Jesus Christ at the beginning of most of his letters. The most astonishing part of Paul and his assertion of being among the apostle of Christ is that, unlike other writers, he almost never quotes Jesus in any of his letters. Yet this is expected from Paul if truly the light he saw falling from heaven was true Jesus Christ.
Paul was also caught lying red handed; he was accused of teaching all the Jews among the Gentiles to forsake circumcision and the Law of Moses (Acts 21:18-31). But instead of proving this accusation to be true or false when the King Agrippa asked him about that accusation, Paul now claimed that he was being accused for the hope of the promise made by God i.e. the resurrection of the dead (Acts 26:1- and for the fact that he advised people to repent and turn to God (Acts 26:19-21). There is nothing like “circumcision and the law of Moses” in the answers presented by Paul to the King. In fact, Paul himself admitted to be a liar when he said: “For if the truth of God has increased through MY LIE to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner (Romans 3:7)”.
Yet the same Paul wrote almost half of the books found in the New Testament. See the foundation upon which the edifice of Christianity is erected!





1. Let me try to explain it again for the last time;
Yes blue and green are different but not contradictory. But God's nature and human nature are not only different but also contradictory. For example, it is very clear that human being is NOT omnipresent. But God is omnipresent (Jeremiah 23:23-24). Therefore, this very unlimited nature of God directly CONTRADICT the limited nature of human being. Hence, these two contradictory natures cannot CO-EXIST SIDE BY SIDE in one person; one has to vacate for the other to stay . And if the two natures were to BLEND with each other, then this will lead to CHANGE and yet God's nature cannot be changed (Malachi 3:6). For this very reason, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Jesus to be both human and God at the same time.
In fact, when Jesus was praying to the Father, he said; "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the ONLY TRUE God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent (John 17:3)" . If Jesus himself was referring to another person (i:e the Father) as the "ONLY true God" , then how could Jesus be God ? If Jesus did not use the word "ONLY", then hopefully the Christians may still want to argue that Jesus is also God just like his Father. However, the phrase "ONLY TRUE God" used by Jesus in reference to the father alone implies that apart from the father all others are FAKE.

2. I have given you sufficient evidence (Acts 10:28, 11:2-3, 19, Galatians 2:7-9, James 1:1, Acts 2:38, 8:16 and 10:48) to show that apostles of Jesus did NOT carry out the two great commands contained in Matthew 28:19. Now if you insist that this Matthew 28:19 actually came out from Jesus' mouth, then you have to believe that God has chosen the WRONG PEOPLE to be the apostles of Jesus; the apostles who neglected the commands from their master.
3. It is very RATIONAL both in the sight of God and men for some one to risk his own life in an attempt to save the lives of others from the harm of the ENEMY. However, if there is alternative and easier way you can take to save the lives of others from the harm of the ENEMY or from the harm of YOUR OWN SELF, then it is highly IRRATIONAL for such a person to risk his own life or the life of his close relative.
You wrote that Justice of God means that He must not let any wrong-doing go unpunished.
But an act of wrong-doing is not a "TANGIBLE SUBSTANCE" you can just transfer from one guilty person to another innocent person. It is absolutely INSEPERABLE from the person that committed the act. For example, there is NO WAY you can punish the act of fornication WITHOUT punishing the fornicators. There is NO WAY you can punish the act of theft WITHOUT punishing the theives. Therefore, if the act of wrong-doing must always be punished as you claim , then it is the very people which committed the act that must be punished; not an innocent and righteous person. See the evidence directly from God's mouth;
"The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. But if a wicked man TURNS (i:e REPENTS) from all his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. NONE OF THE TRANSGRESSIONS which he has committed shall be remembered against him; Because of the RIGHTEOUSNESS which he has done, HE SHALL LIVE. Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?” says the Lord God, “and not that he should TURN FROM HIS WAYS AND LIVE ? (Ezekiel 18:20-23).
As you can see from above, "repentance from our sinful deeds and engaging in the act of righteousness " is what we need to be saved. This is the rational and alternative way that God has chosen to ensure our salvation. THERE IS NO NEED FOR an innocent and righteous son to fall under the CURSE of his own lovely and merciful father before we can be saved.

4. However, the fact that Paul contradicts true Jesus on many important issues is even enough to prove that the revelation he claimed to receive was from fake Jesus Christ. For example, God and Jesus forbid the believers from eating spiritually unclean foods and meat sacrificed to idols (Ezekiel 22:26, Revelation 2:14) but Paul wrote that there is nothing wrong in eating such things as long as you do not eat them in the presence of a weak believer(1st Corinthians 8:8-10, Colossians 2:16).Again, Jesus’ statement in Matthew 24:24 and Matthew 7:21-23 implies that; performing great signs and wonders in Jesus’ name are the things that would accompany the false christs and the false prophets. Yet Paul declare that performing great signs and wonders in Jesus’ name are the things that even commissioned him as true apostle of Jesus Christ (2nd Corinthians 12:12, Romans 15:19). Furthermore, Jesus said: Do NOT THINK I CAME TO DESTROY THE LAW or the (way of the) PROPHETS. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19).

Yet Paul declares as follows: “Christ is the end of the Law (Romans 10:4).
But BEFORE faith came, we were KEPT UNDER GUARD BY THE LAW, kept for the faith which after-ward would be revealed. Therefore, THE LAW WAS OUR TUTOR to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But AFTER faith has come, WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER A TUTOR (Galatians 3:23-25).
Again, despite the fact that circumcision is an everlasting covenant of God for the Jews i:e the Israelites (Genesis 17:9-14) and Jesus himself was also circumcised (Luke 2:21); yet Paul went ahead to write as follows: “Indeed, I Paul say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to EVERY MAN who become circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged (i.e. cut off ) from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace(Galatians 5:2-4)”. The term “EVERY MAN” used by Paul in the verse quoted above is indisputable evidence that he condemned the act of circumcision for both Jews and Gentiles. If this is not the case, then the Jewish believers in the Jerusalem would not bound themselves with oath that they will never eat nor drink until they kill Paul (Acts 23:12-14). In fact, this single fact alone that Paul condemn the act of circumcision, an EVERLASTING covenant of God, is another prove that “the great light from heaven” that appeared to Paul on his road to Damascus was a false Christ as already foretold by Jesus Christ during his earthly ministry.
Furthermore, Bible recorded that the number of Jesus apostles was somehow fixed to be twelve (Matthew 10:2-7, 19:28, Revelation 21:14). Therefore, when Judas Iscariot fell out and there was need for replacement and restoration of original twelve, then one would expect the divine plan to unfold in such a way that original apostles would be pre-informed by Jesus to exercise patience and wait till Paul repents. But instead of waiting for Paul, Matthias was chosen to replace Judas under the guidance of Holy Spirit (Acts 1:20-26). This proves again that apostleship of Paul was not even recognized in heaven. Yet Paul repeatedly called himself an apostle of true Jesus Christ at the beginning of most of his letters. The most astonishing part of Paul and his assertion of being among the apostle of Christ is that, unlike other writers, he almost never quotes Jesus in any of his letters. Yet this is expected from Paul if truly the light he saw falling from heaven was true Jesus Christ.
Paul was also caught lying red handed; he was accused of teaching all the Jews among the Gentiles to forsake circumcision and the Law of Moses (Acts 21:18-31). But instead of proving this accusation to be true or false when the King Agrippa asked him about that accusation, Paul now claimed that he was being accused for the hope of the promise made by God i.e. the resurrection of the dead (Acts 26:1- and for the fact that he advised people to repent and turn to God (Acts 26:19-21). There is nothing like “circumcision and the law of Moses” in the answers presented by Paul to the King. In fact, Paul himself admitted to be a liar when he said: “For if the truth of God has increased through MY LIE to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner (Romans 3:7)”.
Yet the same Paul wrote almost half of the books found in the New Testament. See the foundation upon which the edifice of Christianity is erected!

The statement "many ‘jesuses’ being preached today in Christendom" is very true. Just as with beliefs in a deity, where every believer worships his or her own mental creation based on what template they received from family or church or studies, each of the 40,000 plus varieties of christian sects and denominations and within them each believer has his/her own "Christ" as well.
But that is not just "being preached today". There are three distinct "Jesuses" presented in the New Testament and even more in the Nag Hammadi and other scriptures not included in the Bible. Those three in the Bible are (1) The self-transformed or shapeshifted deity (a.k.a. Logos or Word) of the JOHN gospel and the Pauline letter of Philippians 2:6. who "emptied himself" of his divinity and ended up
3. "taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men", or "became flesh" according to JOHN. (2) The virgin-born Jesus, with God having impregnated the betrothed wife of Joseph, found in MATTHEW AND LUKE. And (3) the human Jesus who was merely adopted by a voice from heaven at the time of his baptism by John, presented in MARK.
Christians could never get together on their idea of Jesus.

The Bible is for all nations but FIRSTLY it came to the Israelites. Before you can fully grasp the purpose of Christianity, it's compulsory that you listen to a Jew who first embrace Christ. Zechariah 8:23
If not you can't understand what the Bible is all about.
The first part of this book of books was written in Hebrew, then later some Prophets penned down their own inspired writings in Aramaic and finally Jews who became Christians penned down their own inspired writings in Greek. Paul was a fervent student of those scrolls from Genesis to Malachi, that's why Jesus employed him to explain it BETTER to other Jews who followed Jesus and also to serve as an APOSTLE for the nations! Hebrew 11:1 1Timothy 3:7 Act 9:15,16
Please if you want to fully understand the Bible as a whole, you need to study this BIG book with Jehovah's Witnesses. These group never used to lenses of the churches (who kept following the traditions of their predecessors) Jehovah's Witnesses looked to all angles to gather facts in order to reach an efficacious conclusion, and when they err in doctrinal matters they never hesitate to make amendments. That's why they're the only group producing the FRUIT of the spirit as listed in the Bible book of Galatians 5:22,23
Note that there is NOBODY who can master those nine qualities for now except Christ Himself out of whom Paul looked to see the qualities! So it's evident that these qualities can only be noticed in the gathering of some individuals AS A GROUP!
Don't expect to see these qualities in any human that's born through the lineage of Adam (Romans 7:21-25) but since God's holy spirit is directing these imperfect humans,you'll notice the FRUIT in them AS A GROUP!
God bless you Sir!

truthlover:
1. Let me try to explain it again for the last time;
Yes blue and green are different but not contradictory. But God's nature and human nature are not only different but also contradictory. For example, it is very clear that human being is NOT omnipresent. But God is omnipresent (Jeremiah 23:23-24). Therefore, this very unlimited nature of God directly CONTRADICT the limited nature of human being. Hence, these two contradictory natures cannot CO-EXIST SIDE BY SIDE in one person; one has to vacate for the other to stay . And if the two natures were to BLEND with each other, then this will lead to CHANGE and yet God's nature cannot be changed (Malachi 3:6). For this very reason, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Jesus to be both human and God at the same time.
In fact, when Jesus was praying to the Father, he said; "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the ONLY TRUE God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent (John 17:3)" . If Jesus himself was referring to another person (i:e the Father) as the "ONLY true God" , then how could Jesus be God ? If Jesus did not use the word "ONLY", then hopefully the Christians may still want to argue that Jesus is also God just like his Father. However, the phrase "ONLY TRUE God" used by Jesus in reference to the father alone implies that apart from the father all others are FAKE.

By your logic, since Green is NOT Blue, the two are contradictory. This is obviously wrong. The two are NOT each other but they do not contradict each other either.

The law of contradiction is that nothing can be both A and not-A. On this we are both agreed.

But the issue is what differences are contradictory and what differences are not. Using your example, the human nature is obviously NOT omnipresent but it certainly does exist in space and is able to change locations. Omnipresence only means existence in all locations at the same time. The difference then is not one of quality but one of degrees. Human nature is limited in ability to inhabit locations where the divine is not. This is not a contradiction.

truthlover:
2. I have given you sufficient evidence (Acts 10:28, 11:2-3, 19, Galatians 2:7-9, James 1:1, Acts 2:38, 8:16 and 10:48) to show that apostles of Jesus did NOT carry out the two great commands contained in Matthew 28:19. Now if you insist that this Matthew 28:19 actually came out from Jesus' mouth, then you have to believe that God has chosen the WRONG PEOPLE to be the apostles of Jesus; the apostles who neglected the commands from their master.

You lie, sir/madam. Even by your own admission, they DID preach to Gentiles albeit reluctantly according to you. Peter's story with Cornelius is one of the most famous in Acts of the Apostles. Phillip's with the Ethiopian eunuch is another. There is no doubt that the apostles and disciples were reluctant to preach to Gentiles because they did not really get that God had decreed that the whole world would be saved. But it is a flat-out lie that they did not preach to Gentiles. They most certainly did.

truthlover:
3. It is very RATIONAL both in the sight of God and men for some one to risk his own life in an attempt to save the lives of others from the harm of the ENEMY. However, if there is alternative and easier way you can take to save the lives of others from the harm of the ENEMY or from the harm of YOUR OWN SELF, then it is highly IRRATIONAL for such a person to risk his own life or the life of his close relative.
You wrote that Justice of God means that He must not let any wrong-doing go unpunished.
But an act of wrong-doing is not a "TANGIBLE SUBSTANCE" you can just transfer from one guilty person to another innocent person. It is absolutely INSEPERABLE from the person that committed the act. For example, there is NO WAY you can punish the act of fornication WITHOUT punishing the fornicators. There is NO WAY you can punish the act of theft WITHOUT punishing the theives. Therefore, if the act of wrong-doing must always be punished as you claim , then it is the very people which committed the act that must be punished; not an innocent and righteous person. See the evidence directly from God's mouth;
"The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. But if a wicked man TURNS (i:e REPENTS) from all his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. NONE OF THE TRANSGRESSIONS which he has committed shall be remembered against him; Because of the RIGHTEOUSNESS which he has done, HE SHALL LIVE. Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?” says the Lord God, “and not that he should TURN FROM HIS WAYS AND LIVE ? (Ezekiel 18:20-23).
As you can see from above, "repentance from our sinful deeds and engaging in the act of righteousness " is what we need to be saved. This is the rational and alternative way that God has chosen to ensure our salvation. THERE IS NO NEED FOR an innocent and righteous son to fall under the CURSE of his own lovely and merciful father before we can be saved.

First, if going to war to risk dying for ungrateful strangers is rational, then so is willingly choosing to die for those you love to save them from the consequences of their actions if possible.

Second, sin is rebellion, or better put, treason against God. It made us God's Enemies. And God became our Enemy too. His Justice cannot permit creature rebellion to go unpunished. This is why Jesus is called our Mediator or Go-between in the Bible. He made peace between us and God by accepting responsibility for all of our sin and being punished for all of it.

Third, perhaps what you consider as God in your mind is a completely different thing from the actual meaning of the word. A true God is not limited in ability. The Bible says both that the Lord Jesus "bore our sins in His Body" and that He "was made sin" for us. It said also that God did not desire sacrifice or offerings; rather, He made a Body for the Lord Jesus with which He was to fulfill His Mission. I see no reason to imagine that God could not have made Him carry literally all our sins in His Body. However that was made possible we don't need to know. It is enough that the Bible says that He did.

If you insist on the intangibility of sin and the impossibility of transfer, I must ask how debt is transferable or cancellable seeing as it too is truly intangible. Documents do nothing more than state the fact of the transfer or elimination of debt. If they are tangible enough for you, then you have no reason to object to God's Own Spiritual reckoning of these things.

truthlover:
4. However, the fact that Paul contradicts true Jesus on many important issues is even enough to prove that the revelation he claimed to receive was from fake Jesus Christ. For example, God and Jesus forbid the believers from eating spiritually unclean foods and meat sacrificed to idols (Ezekiel 22:26, Revelation 2:14) but Paul wrote that there is nothing wrong in eating such things as long as you do not eat them in the presence of a weak believer(1st Corinthians 8:8-10, Colossians 2:16).Again, Jesus’ statement in Matthew 24:24 and Matthew 7:21-23 implies that; performing great signs and wonders in Jesus’ name are the things that would accompany the false christs and the false prophets. Yet Paul declare that performing great signs and wonders in Jesus’ name are the things that even commissioned him as true apostle of Jesus Christ (2nd Corinthians 12:12, Romans 15:19). Furthermore, Jesus said: Do NOT THINK I CAME TO DESTROY THE LAW or the (way of the) PROPHETS. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19).

Yet Paul declares as follows: “Christ is the end of the Law (Romans 10:4).
But BEFORE faith came, we were KEPT UNDER GUARD BY THE LAW, kept for the faith which after-ward would be revealed. Therefore, THE LAW WAS OUR TUTOR to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But AFTER faith has come, WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER A TUTOR (Galatians 3:23-25).
Again, despite the fact that circumcision is an everlasting covenant of God for the Jews i:e the Israelites (Genesis 17:9-14) and Jesus himself was also circumcised (Luke 2:21); yet Paul went ahead to write as follows: “Indeed, I Paul say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to EVERY MAN who become circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged (i.e. cut off ) from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace(Galatians 5:2-4)”. The term “EVERY MAN” used by Paul in the verse quoted above is indisputable evidence that he condemned the act of circumcision for both Jews and Gentiles. If this is not the case, then the Jewish believers in the Jerusalem would not bound themselves with oath that they will never eat nor drink until they kill Paul (Acts 23:12-14). In fact, this single fact alone that Paul condemn the act of circumcision, an EVERLASTING covenant of God, is another prove that “the great light from heaven” that appeared to Paul on his road to Damascus was a false Christ as already foretold by Jesus Christ during his earthly ministry.
Furthermore, Bible recorded that the number of Jesus apostles was somehow fixed to be twelve (Matthew 10:2-7, 19:28, Revelation 21:14). Therefore, when Judas Iscariot fell out and there was need for replacement and restoration of original twelve, then one would expect the divine plan to unfold in such a way that original apostles would be pre-informed by Jesus to exercise patience and wait till Paul repents. But instead of waiting for Paul, Matthias was chosen to replace Judas under the guidance of Holy Spirit (Acts 1:20-26). This proves again that apostleship of Paul was not even recognized in heaven. Yet Paul repeatedly called himself an apostle of true Jesus Christ at the beginning of most of his letters. The most astonishing part of Paul and his assertion of being among the apostle of Christ is that, unlike other writers, he almost never quotes Jesus in any of his letters. Yet this is expected from Paul if truly the light he saw falling from heaven was true Jesus Christ.
Paul was also caught lying red handed; he was accused of teaching all the Jews among the Gentiles to forsake circumcision and the Law of Moses (Acts 21:18-31). But instead of proving this accusation to be true or false when the King Agrippa asked him about that accusation, Paul now claimed that he was being accused for the hope of the promise made by God i.e. the resurrection of the dead (Acts 26:1- and for the fact that he advised people to repent and turn to God (Acts 26:19-21). There is nothing like “circumcision and the law of Moses” in the answers presented by Paul to the King. In fact, Paul himself admitted to be a liar when he said: “For if the truth of God has increased through MY LIE to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner (Romans 3:7)”.
Yet the same Paul wrote almost half of the books found in the New Testament. See the foundation upon which the edifice of Christianity is erected!

Paul NEVER contradicted Jesus Christ.

i. The Lord Jesus actually declared all foods clean when He said that everything that is eaten goes through the body and is eliminated but what comes out of the heart is really what defiles us.

ii. If we take that to be true, then every single apostle and evangelist and believer who did miracles in Acts of the Apostles was a false Christ and false prophet. That would include Peter and John. But we know that in Matthew 24, the Lord Jesus was referring to the Tribulation. In Matthew 7, the Lord Jesus was speaking of people who deceived themselves with make-believe miracles and sorcery. Clearly, the Lord Jesus gave the disciples power to perform miracles when He sent them out two by two and in groups multiple times. So, in no way can it be said that Paul was a false Christ or false prophet just because he performed miracles. And he was exactly right that the stamp of his authority as a member of the Twelve was the miracles he did and the things he suffered.

iii. The Law was perfectly fulfilled by the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross. Therefore, it was removed by that Sacrifice just as the Lord Jesus pretty much said (:the Law would only pass away after it had been fulfilled). So, Paul was directly in line with the Lord Jesus.

iv. The Lord Jesus told the Samaritan woman that the time would come when the worship of God would be in spirit and in truth so that the religious system of the Jews including circumcision would become irrelevant to true worship of the true God. Paul was therefore agreeing with Christ again there.

v. There is absolutely no reason why the Lord would pre-inform the apostles of anything. There is no evidence that He informed any of them that there would be other apostles as He selected them in their own turn. It was neither their business nor in particular ours. Ours is to know that He has chosen and who He chose if He is pleased to tell us His Choice.

vi. On your comment on Matthias, read my last post again. The Spirit was given in chapter 2 and the vote occurred in chapter 1. Additionally, no apostle was ever elected except for Matthias. Each one was specifically chosen and personally called by the Lord Jesus just as Paul was.

vii. Paul quoted Jesus about the Communion when he was warning the Corinthians about the terrible judgment associated with receiving it unworthily.

viii. It is you who lie. Paul stated the real reason why he was being persecuted. It had far less to do with circumcision and the law since they arrested him fulfilling a vow according to the Law and helping some other men at his own expense to do the same than it had to do with his proclaiming the resurrection of Jesus Christ Whom the Jews hated with a violence.

ix. Paul never admitted to being a liar. He simply offered a hypothetical about an unbeliever who is trying to justify himself by claiming that God cannot condemn him if his sin only served to further God's Plans. You are an incredible liar, sir/madam.


My answers right now are quite rushed but I am confident that they are correct. I just wish I could make more time to actually give you harder ones. You are a very dishonest person. You clearly know what a Bible is and you can read it. Why then you pick and choose things in it and completely ignore others that do not serve your agenda can only be explained by an inveterate dishonesty that is determined to destroy faith in Jesus Christ by any means necessary.

Pls me to resolve John1:1,14 which proclaim that Jesus is God and John 17:3 which proclaim that ONLY the father is true God .

what I consider most times that make me refuse to go along with Christianity is this
if God is love and truly omnipotent then this are things he shouldn't have done
1)create the forbidden tree, why cause he knows man being a curious being and free willer will surely want to taste of the fruit
2)he shouldn't have created the devil since he knows every thing and is aware that the devil will cause havoc to what he created
3)he shouldn't have sent his only son to come and die for us since he knows after his son dies man still has the right to choose what he wants
and further most it is so irrational for me to believe that someone who died two thousand years ago will be able to save me from where his own father created
when Christians see this now they will start saying that the ways of God are not the way of men
if this is so then why does he wants us to believe in the way he created
if his ways are not ours
then I think he should just leave us to do our thing rather than telling us to believe in his son who died centuries ago

if any Christian here has any concrete thing to say disputing this feel free let's discuss





bobowaja
hopefulLandlord

Originakalokalo:


1. Jesus was sent to Israel... while he sent the disciples to the world.. John saw him and said... "Behold the lamb of God who took away the sins of the world... "

This is not a problem at all. God designed it this way...God had said that through Abraham, the nations of the world will be blessed....

God mentioned in the Old Testament that Israel would be a kingdom of priests to the rest of the world..Priests preach, that's what they do. Israel was called first, to call others.

The disciples were called... they became priests and called the rest of the world..

2. Jesus is God... The word of God became flesh...

3. Jesus mentioned in the book of John that he WILLINGLY decided to lay down his life... That's why the father loves him so much....

It was not impossed on him... He took up the work of salvation knowing what was involved...

4. This point is very funny and feeble... Must Jesus told the disciples "I am going to appear to Paul oooo"?

Peter mentioned the teachings of Paul in his book... He sanctioned it... I don't know why Paul's experience on the road to Damascus is a problem. ...

A Bible scholar would know that the teaching of Paul are extracts from teaching of Jesus and Old Testament books.. It is very easy to see this...

Remove the books of Paul and you have the four gospel... These four books hold the foundation of the faith in Christianity.

Christianity is based therefore on the teachings of Jesus.

5. Really? The word... Christianity is "Christ like"

...and the people of Antioch used the word.. "Christians " when they saw the life of the apostles and noticed the resemblance to the life of Jesus...

The word.... Christianity was coined from it...

Christianity involves everything Jesus preached... Sin, repentance, salvation, sanctification, concentration and fellowship with God... There is no difference...

So? The fact that it doesn't appear in the Bible has nothing to do with anything..

I don't even know what to say about your point on the issue of "Bible " not appearing in the Bible.

One would easily see that those points are coming from a zealous Muslim... I tell you...

Either the OP copied it from a site and dumped it here, or he as a very zealous Muslim developed it.

I have had encounters with them... and I know how they look for lame points to discredit Christianity...

One of them once said that Jesus asked the disciples who he was because he was not even sure of himself..

smh*

baba pls can u pls explain why those verses contradicts themselves don't forget the same bible says ur God is not an author of confusion

Atewo400:
what I consider most times that make me refuse to go along with Christianity is this
if God is love and truly omnipotent then this are things he shouldn't have done
1)create the forbidden tree, why cause he knows man being a curious being and free willer will surely want to taste of the fruit
2)he shouldn't have created the devil since he knows every thing and is aware that the devil will cause havoc to what he created
3)he shouldn't have sent his only son to come and die for us since he knows after his son dies man still has the right to choose what he wants
and further most it is so irrational for me to believe that someone who died two thousand years ago will be able to save me from where his own father created
when Christians see this now they will start saying that the ways of God are not the way of men
if this is so then why does he wants us to believe in the way he created
if his ways are not ours
then I think he should just leave us to do our thing rather than telling us to believe in his son who died centuries ago

if any Christian here has any concrete thing to say disputing this feel free let's discuss





bobowaja
hopefulLandlord

Atewo400 how are you?

Atewo400:
what I consider most times that make me refuse to go along with Christianity is this
if God is love and truly omnipotent then this are things he shouldn't have done
1)create the forbidden tree, why cause he knows man being a curious being and free willer will surely want to taste of the fruit
2)he shouldn't have created the devil since he knows every thing and is aware that the devil will cause havoc to what he created
3)he shouldn't have sent his only son to come and die for us since he knows after his son dies man still has the right to choose what he wants
and further most it is so irrational for me to believe that someone who died two thousand years ago will be able to save me from where his own father created
when Christians see this now they will start saying that the ways of God are not the way of men
if this is so then why does he wants us to believe in the way he created
if his ways are not ours
then I think he should just leave us to do our thing rather than telling us to believe in his son who died centuries ago

if any Christian here has any concrete thing to say disputing this feel free let's discuss





bobowaja
hopefulLandlord

present sir

bobowaja:
Atewo400 how are you?

very very happy since I became irreligious thanks sir and thanks to seen for a forum like nairaland

hopefulLandlord:


present sir

haha let's wait here for them to come back from where they give money to their pastors
if any Christian can rightly dispute what I am said
that means he is a LIAR

sonmvayina:


no no...they wont, this is way over them...

I would have help but once I saw this I knew you put this up for a fight. Its been a long time I stopped fight for what doesn't put money in my pocket

Atewo400:

very very happy since I became irreligious
thanks sir
and thanks to seen for a forum like nairaland

Smiles.

Think... In simple words