to the firm bible believers?

Question

i really dont mean to insult ur beliefs, nor am i questioning u etc, but i was wondering...do u think theres the slightest possibility that the bible contains simply what the church wants us to read, to believe? isnt it possible that there are in fact , gospels and documents which are records of a more man-like jesus which the church has purposely not shown us? a jesus who so firmly believed in his own teaching 'love ur neighbour' that he actually fell in love himself? isnt loving a woman, and having a child with her, the ultimate form of love?? why do some people find it an insult to think tht jesus fell in love with mary magdalene? is it really tht bad to think tht he felt love for a woman??didnt he call himself 'the son of man?' man falls in love, marries, haves children....well, that what i think....share ur opinions

has children, not haves lol

Answer 1

It is totally plausible that the Bible only contains what the church wants us to read. If you think about it the Bible was completely under the control of the Catholic church for a thousand years, and no one was even allowed to see it that wasn't church leadership.

If you read the Bible there are tons of references to books and prophecies that the Bible doesn't have. If anyone is interested I have a whole list of them that I have found.

As to your other questions I can only say that we don't know and we may never know.

Answer 2

<>

The Bible contains everything we need to know in order to be Saved.


<>

There are documents called "gospels" that are not in the Bible. What you have to understand is that the fact a given writing was called a "gospel" and the fact it is ancient does not mean is belongs in the Bible.

There is a reason why some Gospels are in the Bible and why other gospels are not. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, paint a picture of a very human Jesus, so human in fact that it was believed (by John) that people would forget that Jesus was as much God as He was man. Therefore, John penned his Gospel that paints a picture of a very Divine Jesus.


<>

Jesus loves everyone. God would not create a human being if He didn't love him/her. Therefore, we can use the very fact we exist as evidence to prove Jesus loves us.


<>

No. There is no greater love than when one person lays down his life so that others may live. This statement (paraphrased here) is said by Jesus Himself and is, in part, elluding to His own crucifixion - where He laid down His life so that we might have a shot at Eternal Life in Heaven.


<>

Because such a claim violates basdic Christians Dogma, not to mention the fact such an idea is as unBiblical as it is grossly inaccurate. Whether you mean it as an insult or not, whenever you suggest the possibility to a Christian, it is most likely to insult them.


<>

Romantic love, you mean? Yes because, again, the very idea is unBiblical.


<>

Yes but this fact, in and of itself, does not constitute evidence that Jesus had a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene.


<>

Not everyone. There are some men and women who live their entire earthly lives single. well, that what i think....share ur opinions>>

It's interesting because you seem to be suggesting that a romantic relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene is Biblical. Perhaps you could enlighten with Biblical evidence. . .

Answer 3

If he acted like a mere man then He would not be our Father, our Savior and our Bridegroom. In heaven there is neither male nor female. We are the bride of Christ. We are the sons and daughters of God. We are the body and Christ is the head. We are to put God first in all things. Christ loves Mary Magdalene as He loves you and me, but he loves the men also and this love has nothing to do with sex. Christ died for the women and the men that He loves just the same.

If you'd studied the Bible for years, you would know that no church, no pope, no disciple and no king or emperior or pharaoh could write the B ible. The Bible is the inspired Word of the Living God - King James Version. The Bible is so awesomely tied together from one book to the next or 8 books later that mere man would need to write all at one time both Old and New Testaments and this did not happen. And even if it could have happened the genius to write the Bible doesn't live. God said it is to be read "line upon line, precept upon precept and here a little and there a little." There are often 3 layers to the Bible. The man to understand the Bible, completely and thoroughly has not been born, yet the Bible continually has its prophesies fulfilled to the "t."

No. There is not the slightest possibility that the Bible contains simply what the church wants us to read and believe.
The Pope and all his crew aren't that smart. The Protestant pastors are not that smart.

It takes the mind of more than man to write the Bible and His name is called Almighty God and Jesus the Christ, Yeshua, and Yahweh.

Answer 4

The standard Bible was compiled in 325 AD at the Council of Nicaea, in which around 300 bishops met under the direction of the Roman Emperor Constantine to decide which texts should form the official holy book for the Christian faith. They took all the available texts and sorted them into two groups - the Bible and the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha are all the books and texts that were not made part of the Bible, for example "The Book Of Enoch" and "The Gospel Of St. Thomas". These books still exist (I myself bought a copy of the Book Of Enoch in a Christian book shop a couple of years ago) and most churches consider them important holy texts but not always accurate ones.

Some of the books of the Apocrypha were left out of the Bible because they were too similar to one of the included texts, some were too different, some were considered to not be accurate, some were actually Zoroastrian texts and some were left out for political reasons (for example they supported the heretical teachings of Arius).

However nowhere in any of the books of the Bible, the Apocrytha, or any of the various traditions of any of the ancient Christian churches:
-The Roman Catholic Church (Europe)
-The Orthodox Church (Greece, and Eastern Europe)
-The Coptic Church (North Africa)
-The Syrian Church (The Middle East)
-The Church Of St. Thomas (India)
Or any of the modern Christian Churches is there ANY book that says Jesus was ever married. The closest is "The Gospel Of David" that says that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were "koinonos" (Greek for a friend or companion). This is literally the closest any Christian text ever came to saying there was anything between them.

So basically the main problem I have with the whole Jesus being married theory is that there is NOT ONE SHRED of real evidence for it. Not in any of the various forms of Christrianity, including the Coptic Church which uses a different (and older) form of the Bible that contains some books not featured in the Catholic or Orthodox Bibles.
Mary Magdalene could have been married to Jesus but by the same token she could have never married anyone, married one of Jesus's brothers (he DID have brothers - they are mentioned in the Bible and the Apocrypha), or married a Roman legionary, or a gladiator, or a man who was much younger than her, or been a lesbian. There simply is NO evidence.

Personally I am happy to consider a Jesus closer to the description of Arius of Alexandria, a more human Jesus than divine and the dichotomy of this being part of His nature. However again this is just an unfounded theory.

So that's my opinion on that. I hope you have a brilliant day and I am off to watch Catherine Tate on BBC1.

Answer 5

Nobody has to believe anything. What happens is that people hear the gospel. They may not even come near a Bible, and often didn't/don't, in 'communist' countries, or in poorer countries where they couldn't read a Bible even if there was one to read. They hear the gospel, and some of them are converted. They change. They become different people, very different people, with very different motives. And they get loved by some, and they get hated by others. And if they get hold of a Protestant Bible, or part of one, they love it, without exception. They use it as their reference point. So any of their enemies who want to change them back the way they were, have to trick them about the Bible. And they try, in many ways.

So other people can believe the books about Jesus that converted people don't accept, if they want to, though they never seem to with much conviction, if they believe them at all. But they aren't going to change those people who have been converted by the gospel into different people. Changed people will still believe the 66 books of the Bible, nothing more, nothing less. It's always been the same, since the Bible was re-discovered in the 14th century, and it will always be the same.
.

Answer 6

You are right that Jesus was a man and the Bible reveals that he experienced the things that human beings do, but by the same token, he was the eternal God incarnate, and as such he knew he had a mission to accomplish. This was God as man, soon to return to heaven. It is not as though God needs a female of his creatures to make him feel complete. The deal about Mary Magdalene is far-fetched because there is absolutely nothing to suggest anything like this. The only way anyone would think that, would be if they were watching modern movies like the DaVinci Code or something that was trying to make such a connection. The church exists as a valuer of truth, and it is because eyewitnesses wrote what Jesus said and did that there is even a church of which to speak. No conspiracy here, only those of unbelievers who try very hard to make Jesus just another ordinary guy. He wasn't. Had Jesus, as man, fallen in love with a women, it would be odd, but if it had happened the Bible would have told us about it. In any event, no human love interest played any role in the work of Christ, and nothing like that would add anything to his message or the message of redemption. I don't think it would harm the Gospel, but it just isn't a factor. There are no other documents recognized as Scripture, or they would be Scripture. Everything that has been pointed to lately as alternate "gospels" etc were written long after the fact, and they have nothing to offer of any real value. Stick to the Bible. God Himself preserves his word. Christ really came and what he taught and did is found there. If people paid more attention to that rather than trying to find fault with the church for supposedly hiding spurious stories of space aliens, and drug use, and Jesus having sex, then the truth would set them free and Christ's church would grow as he intended.

Answer 7

I was always of the opinion that Religion was a faith and the Bible a set of ethics of that time in the form of a book. What was written about the main character would therefore be paramount. They were bound to leave out some things that ran against some higher ethic ... however, if they were left out, we have no way of knowing how (if at all) those things would effect a modern day outlook to those of faith.

To state "he" fell in love etc. etc. .. would be as much proved as not. So, theoretically there are bound to be other versions ... but as an analogy of the good of humanity, I don't see the difference (although they may have done in a time when to restrict sexual activity was the norm.) And that is about the crux of it, there are extremists in many Religions and what seem to be the many sects within religions ... all of which have their own morality spin on it ... law of the world would state some are bound to be strict to that they hold true.

Answer 8

I don't have a problem with the possibility he was in love with possibly Mary Magdalene,he was 100% human after all.
I do know from personal experience that the Bible is correct to tell us that Jesus was God in the flesh and the only way we can be saved is by calling on Him to come into our hearts and to help us to live through Him daily by practicing the things he preached and practiced also.

Answer 9

You are missing out on the point of who Jesus is and why He came. He has been alive, in Heaven, since before the beginning of creation. He came to earth as a man solely for the purpose of defeating death and to do that, He had to die. God cannot die, so He had to be in the body of a human to do so. Although He was fully human, He was also fully God and never got sidetracked from His purpose in coming here. Jesus' eyes were always firmly fixed on Heaven and not on the ways or the things of man. He had to remain pure and free from sin of any kind. To have fallen in love or to be married would have made something else more important in His life. If He didn't give in to temptation from the master of temptation himself (Satan), do you really think He would have given into the temptation of a woman? :)

Answer 10

I am glad that you asked and perhaps are even currious as to what us "crazy Christians" believe and why. The Bible (Old Testament) has many prophecies that are well known to have been made well before Jesus came to Earth. He fulfilled them (New Testament), no one else could have, even if they set out to do so. Many things fulfilled are even recorded outside of the Bible by those hostile to Christianity. I trust in a Jesus that rose from the dead as evidenced not only by what is written in the Bible, but also found many places outside of scripture. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, I am sure the Jews and Romans would have found a way to produce his body. Also, people would have refuted the claims of the disciples, as they wrote and preached of things that occurred during the time of their readers/audience. Example: If I were to say JFK was strangled to death by Hulk Hogan in a wrestling match held in Chicago, older people (witnesses) would know I was full of bull and say as much.
If you truly want to know what Christians believe and WHY, and what eveidence we have for our beliefs see the resources below. Often times we are told a lot of garbage that is put out by today's media, and they seek out the most liberal theologians they can find. The Da Vinci code nonsense is just that. Resources are available for that too.
Contrary to the media's portrayal of Christians, we are NOT all a bunch of retarded fools mindlessly following the statements of an ecclesiastical declaration. Many have exained the evidence extensively, and after much study, have found that the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, points to Jesus as Lord and Savior. I would strongly encourage you to do the same. If you still do not believe, at least you know you have not done it out of ignorance or by swallowing the "doctrine" of the often liberal, anti-Christian media. I especially recommend the first two books I mentioned.

Answer 11

Hon, I don`t normally answer a question with an answer but I will this time..

How is it that you will believe an eyewitness today but not eyewitness reports of those days? You do realize that the bible is history? Those places are still being occupied by the same peoples now?

There is tons of evidence that backs this book up. It is historically accurate. It is archaeologically accurate. You do know that they DID keep records and those records still exist. They had census, taxes paid, all criminal records and the punishments thereof. There is genealogical records. It has very much been proved to be accurate historically.. Sooooo,

How many miracles do you need?

How many eyewitnesses do you need?

Peace and Merry CHRISTmas from Texas <><