Hello BOAZ,

1. The fig tree thing: Matthew 21:18-22; Mark 11:12-14, 20-21. Some scholars have addressed the issue of figs being out of season at the time of Jesus' petulent wobbly. Some others have tried to engineer his actions back to the OT and back into prior times, Jeremiah 29 & Hosea 9.

The tree thing, the temple thing, not honouring his mother. Doesn't seem "perfect" to me. Appears he had problem with his temper and bad attitude, despite the Sermon on the Mount stuff.

2. If you have before and after X-rays of the fracture and the un-facture, togther showing a miracle; I suggest you send these items, via a public notary, to James Randi, who is offering a million dollar plus incentive for physical evidence of a miracle.

3. Did Jesus commit suicide?

4. As you probably know the Latin church and the Orthodox church disagreed on whether or not the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father "or" the Father and the Son and in 1054 CE the Latins wanted added "Filioque" to the older creed. This problematic. Both can't be right. Moreover, accepting a sequence of events, would suggest a time when the Spirit did not exist in some heavenly realm, which one would suppose is outside of causality and our space-time continuum.
Was god perfect before the Holy Spirit entered the picture? If, by definition, god is unchanging why does its godhead change?

5. The Son of God concept goes back to Ancient Egyptians centuries before JC became a superstar :). Horus [the god, not our thread friend] was righteous and "the only beloved son of Osiris (Serapis)" [Wells]. He visited Earth and later " 'ascended to the Father' to become one with the father" to intercede on behalf of sinners with the father [Wells]. When did all this happen? About 300 BCE!

[It is interesting that Constantine seemingly melded the Christian/Jesus [Horus-like] godhead to a sun god too, over six hundred years later, Sol Invictus.]

BOAZ,

Greetings.

Above, I provided horrific account of Christians persecuting the pagans. Barker provides an account of the Christians, which echos Gibbon's account from centuries prior.

Of the First Crusade on 15 July 1099:

"The slaughter was terrible; the blood of the conquered ran down the streets, until men splashed in blood as they rode. At nightfall, 'sobing excess of joy' the [Christian] crusaders came to the Sepulchre from their treading of the wine press, and put their blood-stained hands together in prayer" [to Jesus] - Barker ed. Encyclopaedia Brittanica.

Hi Oliver.
quite a bit to grapple with there mate.

1/ Jesus not perfect.
a) He had 'fits of temper' ? .. Yes.. on one occasion, the cleansing of the temple. This was fulfillment of prophecy, I find this an easy one.
b) He did not honor his parents? Who is his Father ? :) I don't have a problem with this one either.
c) He cursed the fig tree. This one... I find difficult. I can hypothesize all manner of explanation, but it would just be me speculating. See this discussion please:
http://www.rationalchristianity.net/fig_tree.html

I don't on any of these points find them pointing to an imperfect Jesus.

2/ TEMPTATION: The physics etc.
A very difficult issue to reduce into 'physical realites' to be honest. But I see no need for it. The Scriptures do not tell us all the spiritual dynamics of God, Jesus, Satan, Heaven, Hell, but they do provide sufficient for salvation.

In regard to Jesus claim of Sonship, and Messiahship, and being our Saviour, I refer you to his signs. Please read John 20:31

CJ (and Oliver) your response to my healing account is understandable, and to be expected. I hold no ill will about your skepticism. Let me just point out though, that (Oliver) mentioning that bloke who will pay a Million dollars, I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. God is not a sideshow, nor does He need to pander to human 'tests' like that. There is plenty of evidence if he wanted to seek it out. Including x-rays etc. But I doubt that there would ever be in the world an example of a 'staged' test for God.
-Atheists challenge Christian pastor to 'heal' someone.
-They find a person crippled from birth.
-Photographs are taken.
-Pastor is told "OK..GO FOR IT"

*think* about that :)

"If a blind man leads a blind man, won't they both fall into a pit" ?
Said Jesus.

OLIVER.. I was ribbing you about the 'racism' thing :) not serious.

Regarding the crusades etc.. that was 'geopolitics with a religious side salad' at work.

All you need do, is read the Gospels, Acts,and Pauls letters to see how far that is from being 'Christian'.

The point which CAN be made though, is that when a religion is based on 'human' solutions to international problems, you will see a terrible outcome, the crusades were just one example, Al Qaeda is another, but even back to the founding of Islam, it was on that same basis. "Human" methods.. war, attacks, invasions.. lots of sex...
and ALL with the religious authorization.

Show me an 'authorization' or.. an example of military conquest or even military methods in the Lord Jesus... it's impossible :)

And please don't dredge up Luke 19:27 where it is the KING in the parable who says "bring those enemies of mine here and slay them"
Jesus himself is not saying that for his own sake. (Though, it does point to the day of Judgement)

BD, I notice you again narrowed the field to Jesus. I assume that you won't accept examples from his dad of which there are plenty, if so what do you do with John 10:30 (for those not familiar with it Jesus says "I annd the Father are one").

On the other hand if you do believe that Jesus is one with the father then examples of authorisation for military conquest, slaughter of children and other non-combatants are rife.

Over to you - is Jesus one with the father?

R0bert

"Regarding the crusades etc.. that was 'geopolitics with a religious side salad' at work." - BOAZ

1. It was Church directed miltiary politics. The Pope diminished the capacity of kingdoms to militarily challenge Rome by having armies deployed elsewhere.

Other matters:

2. I have said before in other discussions that God, Jesus, Scriptures and the Church/Christians need to treated as separate constructs. That said, one needs, one needs to recognise that the idea of a Church and Priesthood is "outside" of Jesus. It was thousands of years before JC established as a means of control over people and wealth.

3. Before looking at JC historically one needs to do away with or treat with great suspicion evrything from Paul to today, especially Nicaea. The institutionalised Christian Church will interpret the scriptures to its benefit. JC and the rest of us are the "side salad".

4. Jesus did smite cities. Recall that Jesus forms part of the Christian godhead and is at one with his father. Jehovah was very active in a military sense and an ethnic cleansing sense, so by way of the unity of the Trinity, so was Jesus. One needs to accept this or drop the Trinity.

5. Looking for to replies to my questions and points raised.

6. One can't critique the Islamic clerics and promote Christian clerics. They are both tarred with the same brush.

I'll leave it here, as my points are stating to pile up and I await a response to several others.

Regards,

O.