69/71 # 113355 Strange thought From: AGENT 008 on Fri Sep 8 8:24pm crossed my mind recently. By what is shown throughout history how can God be said to exist? I mean if he were TRULY as consistant and perfect as most heavy religists claim, why do people's(society's) views constantly change on the subject? The only true religion of God would have to be that of the Jews or of a Jew that believed in Christ. Now this wonder that crossed my mind doesn't really represent my views but on a literal side to it all, which I am not, this confuses me. 70/71 # 113372 So, Cave Man... From: THE HULKING BRUTE on Sat Sep 9 2:22am what you're saying is, uh, virgins aren't human? Oh, okay, I see... 71/71 # 113396 Ummmm From: MOHAWK CHICK on Sat Sep 9 1:56pm Oliver has a point there. But I didn't interpret Cave Man to be saying that people that choose to not have sex are not human, but rather that it is a human characteristic to desire sex. This is true that all human (including Jesus - who was also true human as well as true God) do have sexual desires, but the Christian point is that those desires don't have to control you, you can be self controlled and life a celibate life if you so desire to. It's not impossible to conform your sexuality to God give{n limitations.{ I believe that Jesus was celibate because there is no record of his marriage to anyone, and Something that important would not have been overlooked. And accord{ng to Jewish Law (that God insituted) sex outside of Marriage is wrong, and if Jesus really was God, thenHe would not have violated his OWN law. Fire Escape 81/86 # 113399 Goodbye everyone... From: FIRE ESCAPE on Sat Sep 9 2:59pm This is just a note to wish everyone a good fall and to say goodbye to everyone I know here. I am cutting down the number of boards I call to give me more time for other pressing matters in my life, and this board was indicated. I just want you all to know that I will miss you all very much and maybe in the future if circumstances allow it, I may return again. I have enjoyed our discussions here and will never forget the experiences you have added to my life here on Rolla. God Bless you all and may you find your peace and hope in His Son. { 66/68 # 113432 What? From: HYPERBOREAN MENACE on Sun Sep 10 1:27pm Did you really say that Jesus had sexual desires? I can't believe it! The same woman who protested The Last Temptation of Christ for that same reason? I guess you should have seen the movie before you damned it... Why the change of heart? 67/68 # 113435 Jews From: PROFESSOR XAVIAR on Sun Sep 10 1:53pm Jews who believe in Christ is an oxymoron. A Jew believes that the Messiah has yet to come and therefore, don't recognize the New Testament. Just clearing things up. 68/68 # 113476 Hype From: FIRE ESCAPE on Mon Sep 11 6:40pm MY objection to TLTOC was NOT the portrayal of Jesus having Sexual desires, a Desire is not a "sin" (see James 1:15), My { objection was Jesus's SIN. The movie protrayed Jesus in Many various sins, and the Jesus that is GOD DID NOT SIN. That's the difference. Sexual desires are not evil, allowing them to lure you into an immoral expression of them is. Don't put words in my mouth and I won't put any in yours. I HOPE this can be my LAST post on this board. Thankyou. Fire Escape 52/66 # 113487 Oh darn... From: HYPERBOREAN MENACE on Mon Sep 11 8:48pm It looks like I may be making you post again, FE (assuming you're around to read this message). It's been a few months since I saw the Last Temptation, so my memory may not serve me entirely correctly, but I don't recall Jesus sinning in the Last Temptation. Perhaps you could refresh my memory on the specifics... Which sins portrayed in the movie were you protesting exactly? Oh, BTW, I'm curious... Did you ever end up seeing the movie or reading the book? 53/66 # 113495 I don't think she did. From: NIKADEMUS on Mon Sep 11 11:27pm As I recall, those sins where just dreams that Christ had while up on the cross. How can one sin in a dream? Perhaps if someone would kindly point out any of the 10 commandments that Jesus broke in that film? The ability to seperate fact from fantisy is one that few people seem to have. The supposid sins where just a fantisy made by a human mind about ready to die, not commited by the human body. Once again, here is the difference between Spirt, Physical and Mental bodies. The bible only covers the Spirt and Physical re-births, nothing about mental re-births. About the pysicological mind, and how to tame it. I also belive there is a Psuedological mind and a realm of conscienceness that is a plane of existance where the mind dwells. Not quite a heaven or hell. The shroud was, by scientific methods, shown to be false. The church only showed it about once or twice every 10 years, and wouldn't let anyone touch it. As I recall, some members of the particular church that displayed it claimed that it is proof of Jesus existing in our world, and is evidence of a maricle. I belive these comments where made in a movie about the shroud, when they reviewed the history of it. So a few members of a certain church did claim it was real. Jesus was a jew, and at the time very few jews did belive that Jesus was the messiah. He had 12 people at least, and a member of the Pharisees named Nicodemus (No relation to my handle) in St. John, Chapter 3. He even called Jesus (or rather adressed him) "Rabbi, ...", so if one goes by the bible, at the time only a few Jews did belive that Jesus was what he claimed he was. For all we know, the romans cencored the news, denounced Jesus, and called him a fake. There is a bit of history left out. The bible cannot cover everything. I find it hard to belive that 4 scribes would lose 25 years of Jesus's life, all at the same part in the story. There must have been some censorship in the bible. The original scrolls where cut. They had to be. 54/66 # 113534 Again, although From: AGENT 008 on Tue Sep 12 7:58pm it's on a little more religious side than I believe, who cares if 25 years are missing? What differemce does it make? I mean he wouldn't have done very well just all of a sudden coming out and telling people what to do with no education. If he is as the bible says he is, and he wasn't naturally infinityly knowledgeable, wouldn't he have to study? If he really wanted to help influence humanity at all he would need many years of study. And to live all those years he would have to work. Anyway, although I'm not, I think I take the Jew stance a little. I believe Jesus was a good preacher, but not necessarily a messenger of God. Also an additional note. Jesus probably couldn't have gotten followers all at once. Maybe nobody really knewwhat he really did before he had people to right things for him. If he never had the twelve to follow him we may have had nothing from his life. Weren't they all the people who wrote his life. Anyway since censorship seems human nature I'm sure the writers left some "questionable" stuff out. 55/66 # 113716 Well, I hate to repeat From: IRONMAN on Sun Sep 17 8:47am myself, but, The Shroud of Turnin was NOT shown to be a fake. By ANY means® What commandments did Jesus not follow in the movie TLTC ? "Thou shall not commit adultery". "Thou shall not covet your neighbor's house. Thou shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his namservant or madservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor. " etc. 56/66 # 113719 Shroud of Turin. From: STRAWBERRY BLONDE on Sun Sep 17 12:09pm If you don't believe in scientific methods and carbon-14 dating, then the Shroud of Turin has not been proven to be a fake. Scientists were finally allowed to take a few threads to perform C-14 dating on last year and from their tests concluded it could not ahave been made any earlier that the 4th (or 5th, I don't remember exactly) century A.D. The earliest mention of that particular artifact is around the time indicated by the tests which is hundreds of years after the reported crucifixion. 57/66 # 113725 You both are confused From: UATU on Sun Sep 17 2:49pm The shroud of turin was not shown to be a fake because it was only guessed to be the burial cloth of Jesus. Also it was not dated by Carbon fourteen (which is to in-acurate for a meer 2000 years) but by another method. These are perhaps nit-picky details, but I wanted to prevent people argue on false pretenses (Especial about c-14, I've been in too many of those)® The new method is FAR more accurate than c-14 and was repeatedly used on pieces of the sample to verify the findings. The initial staement of the church was that even though it wasn't the burial cloth they would regard it as relegious art. 58/66 # 113736 Religiously From: AGENT 008 on Sun Sep 17 6:18pm does it make a difference? I t hink it has already been said but nobody should need something like the shroud to chose what they believe in. Whether it is the covering cloth of Jesus makes no religious difference. In fact to try to make it true could be considered nothing more than making it another IDOL. Like the cross and the bible are for many already. 59/66 # 113752 Let's assume From: PERCEPTIVE on Mon Sep 18 7:37am it's not the burial cloth of Jesus? Anybody have any good theories on what it might be and/or where it came from? Seems like now it's just a bigger mystery than ever. 60/66 # 113761 Ironman From: HYPERBOREAN MENACE on Mon Sep 18 4:17pm Since FE has voluntarily been deleted from this BBS, would you care to take over where she left off regarding The Last Temptation of Christ? If so, recall that FE said Jesus DID have sexual desires and that that was not a sin in itself, so long as one did not commit these acts in person (out of wedlock). FE (and appearantly the Bible) seems to believe that one may covet as much as he desires to without commiting sin. Are you arguing this? Perhaps you should take up this issue with FE. As for the sin of adultery, at no point in the film did Jesus commit adultery, as far as I cam remember. I'll ask you the same question I asked of FE, did you ever seen the movie or read the book in its entirety? 61/66 # 113767 I thought From: AGENT 008 on Mon Sep 18 10:14pm the most excepted theory, outside of religion, was that the Shroud was a product of a 14th century artist. Also I do assume it is true that after a few thousand years C14 dating is inaccurate. But would the inaccuracies read as recent or just not clear readings? I understand the basic principle it is based on. The half lifes of radio isotopes of carbon which is supposed to be a ppredictable process. But the 14th century or even the 1st century weren't quite 2000 years off. 62/66 # 113769 How From: PERCEPTIVE on Mon Sep 18 11:16pm would the artist know how or even want to make the shroud a photo negative image? Also, although it probably doesn't mean much, I almost certain they determined that there were real blood stains on the shroud in the areas of the wounds. 63/66 # 113771 things... From: MR MODEM on Tue Sep 19 12:31am According to "Archiology in North America" carbon dating going back 2000 years is innaccurate +/- 200 years. I beileve the est. date of the shroud was well within the limits of not dating back to the death of Jesus. You also must remember, Jesus was not the only one that they put to the cross. The cross was a very common method of execution. The shroud could have been from anyone that was executed in that manner. Personnally, I do not believe it was a fake to make people think it was used to cover Jesus's dead body. 64/66 # 113789 Hype, would it be okay From: THE PRODIGAL SON on Tue Sep 19 4:36pm if I answered some of your questions? I can't speak for Fire Escape, but my views on the subject of 'The Last Temptation' are similar to hers. First, I stand by the statement that Jesus never sinned. However, He WAS tempted to sin, which is quite different from sin itself. He just never gave in to those temptations. My real objection to the movie was in that it portrayed a Jesus who did not know who he was. It portrayed him as "wanting to die", and basically as a deceived lunatic. Its hardly an accurate depiction of the Son of the Living God. I believe FE feels similarly. Ironman? 65/66 # 113795 Well from an objective From: AGENT 008 on Tue Sep 19 7:46pm viewpoint, what other kind of person, if not the actual Son of God, would become as he did other than a lunatic? Also from my finite bible understanding I thought in fact Jesus did act like he wanted to die. Or at least die for the people. Anyway it doesn't matter. In fact from what I've heard I think that movie somewhat agrees with what I think Jesus MIGHT have been. Also one of the "we hold these rights self evident" applies to not having to think like a good literal Christian. you can but you don't have to. So it seems to me that all those active protestors are basically the type of people who want a theocracy dictatorship. Generalized I know but to me is SEEMS that way. 66/66 # 113811 well then From: CHILDHOOD TRAUMA on Tue Sep 19 9:32pm prodigal son, I take it from your words that you saw the movie/read the book. or did someone tell you how it was portrayed? heh heh heh. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- JAVA'S WITNESSING SUB --------------------- From: NIKADEMUS on Mon Sep 11 11:14pm nice touch. I'm getting tired of the Bible Thumpers having their own board to post about how evelotion is wrong because some scientist cheated on a fossile find, or final exam test. It's like saying that 2+2=4 is false because a 7 year old cheated on a math test, and then fudged the answers. Ever get on a BBS called 'The Word'? They have text files up against evolution that take the sentance 'I don't agree with evolution because it goes against God!' and stretch it out into 8 paragraphs, using illogical statements backed up with verses that are real cryptic in the bible. About 8 paragraphs worth of NULL-SPEAK (TM). The number is 314-227-8844 and it is run by a Baptist Church. It needs some good debaters on there. Most of the bible thumpers have been ingoring my questions of "Where did Cain's wife come from?" and "What happened to the teenage years of Jesus, and if so, why didn't the bible mention what he did or where he went for those 25 years?" and a few others. Way I figure, if they use verses from a book to support why math and science doesn't work. We can use verses from Sci Fi books to support just the same. After all, if you use writings by someone that supports what you are saying it would look right too! 13/18 # 113533 Heh Nick From: AGENT 008 on Tue Sep 12 7:51pm are those people on there pure literists? If not those questions you talk about really have no point in life. Well anyway I wouldn't mind recking havac on a board(just kidding). I know, should we spread the word that Stephen Donaldson is God because he created a world in his mind? Yeah really lets get a group organized and start doing what the thumpers do on boards like this. Any one call M.A.C. ever? It's a board devoted to creationism. anti-evolutionism. I did but haven't called back because the menu's would take tooo much time to get used to right now in my life. 14/18 # 113574 Yes, From: S'TALON on Wed Sep 13 4:56pm Stephen Donaldson is god, succeeding Robert A. Heinlein as god when he died. 18/18 # 113715 So you guys really believe From: IRONMAN on Sun Sep 17 8:43am that a guy named Robert Heinlein really lived ? Boy....talk about suckers.