what is your god money religion a person they will all fail Jesus wont-thanks princess and prince's and any that care to live lesser than the prince of peace -Isaiah 9vs 6 "Unto us a child is born, a son is given, and he will be the prince of peace, the almighty God, and the wonderful counselor." yes and since i let him in my heart Jesus truely is all this!
2006-07-31 21:43:05 · 14 answers · asked by ? 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
David,
You are a christian. Stop this evil and deceptive form of missionizing. It degrades christianity.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ApnC4dngKeRuGKyqQldbLd_zy6IX?qid=20060723102937AA4N2eb
on the side, it's very revealing how you've misquoted the verse. for example, leaving out the "eternal father" line. then again, it does not seem to me that you are sincerely looking for answers, so I guess it all makes sense: Propaganda.
2006-07-31 21:48:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
As a jew, I never understood that whole Jew for Jesus thing.
How are you still a jew? Once you get jesus, you become Christian. There is like one iota of difference between the two (biblically speaking, not practicality)
and that iota happens to be your new lord and savior.
Jump ship man!
We don't want you anymore!
Go! GO!
2006-07-31 22:14:09 · answer #2 · answered by AprilRocksIt 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is a good Jewish boy like you hanging out with Jesus for. Go to Shul and daven to Hashem. I think they brain washed you.
2006-07-31 21:48:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources derive from hearsay accounts.
Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.
Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay provides no proof or good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.
If you do not understand this, imagine yourself confronted with a charge for a crime which you know you did not commit. You feel confident that no one can prove guilt because you know that there exists no evidence whatsoever for the charge against you. Now imagine that you stand present in a court of law that allows hearsay as evidence. When the prosecution presents its case, everyone who takes the stand against you claims that you committed the crime, not as a witness themselves, but solely because other people said so. None of these other people, mind you, ever show up in court, nor can anyone find them.
Hearsay does not work as evidence because we have no way of knowing whether the person lies, or simply bases his or her information on wrongful belief or bias. We know from history about witchcraft trials and kangaroo courts that hearsay provides neither reliable nor fair statements of evidence. We know that mythology can arise out of no good information whatsoever. We live in a world where many people believe in demons, UFOs, ghosts, or monsters, and an innumerable number of fantasies believed as fact taken from nothing but belief and hearsay. It derives from these reasons why hearsay cannot serves as good evidence, and the same reasoning must go against the claims of a historical Jesus or any other historical person.
Authors of ancient history today, of course, can only write from indirect observation in a time far removed from their aim. But a valid historian's own writing gets cited with sources that trace to the subject themselves, or to eyewitnesses and artifacts. For example a historian today who writes about the life of George Washington, of course, can not serve as an eyewitness, but he can provide citations to documents which give personal or eyewitness accounts. None of the historians about Jesus give reliable sources to eyewitnesses, therefore all we have remains as hearsay.
2006-08-03 16:35:17 · answer #4 · answered by jmatt_inc 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Let me help you out here:
Jesus is a dead guy that may, or may not, have lived many years ago. I couldn't understand the rest, you appeared to ramble on a bit. Amen.
2006-07-31 21:47:22 · answer #5 · answered by powhound 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes God is always the anser read my page
2006-08-01 07:15:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
been blood bought since I was 13 and I thank the everlasting KING OF KINGS and LORD OF LORDS for being so good to a petty soul like me and that he is gracious enough to forgive a wretch like me.
2006-07-31 21:51:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
David, you should listen to your elders and cease immediately.
Even as a non-believer I know you are doing your religion a serious discredit.
2006-07-31 21:47:21 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The good old record seems to be stuck in the groove.
2006-07-31 21:47:32 · answer #9 · answered by VedBard 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
thats great david I am very happy you found the truth I just pray all Jews may
2006-07-31 21:49:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋