God is...

[themickey]

You didn't read the article. It shows the same message, the same way of salvation, was described in the Old Testament.

Hey, I'll even add a few verses they didn't, from the Old Testament:

Rend your heart and not your garments. Return to the LORD your God, for he is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love, and he relents from sending calamity.
Joel 2:13

Take words with you, And return to the LORD. Say to Him, “Take away all iniquity; Receive us graciously, For we will offer the sacrifices of our lips.
Hosea 14:2

Note here, "Take away all iniquity" is the same as New Testament faith. To become saved as described in the New Testament, there must be a turning of one's heart in repentance, asking God and trusting His provision, to take away our iniquity. The New Testament is clearer that the sacrifice of Jesus is the Substitute so that He can take away our iniquity, but in both the Old Testament and New Testament, there was repentance from sin and faith that God could and would save and deliver from sin.​

“Look to Me, and be saved, All you ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.
Isaiah 45:22​

The Old Testament has 929 chapters, 23,214 verses which comprise roughly 622,700 words.
In amongst that, one can grab anything and make it mean whatever you want, especially when King James a piss headed Presbyterian who was keen on men got hold of it.

 

[themickey]

Maybe was a writers strike during that time.

And for the related question on why the Romans didn't save a record of Jesus' crucifixion, it was on a Friday, and everyone wanted to leave early for the weekend.

There are, of course, attempts at more serious explanations.
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-it-ta...f-Jesus-for-anyone-to-write-formal-scriptures
https://www.quora.com/Why-were-gospels-not-written-immediately-after-Jesus-death-and-resurrection
https://www.quora.com/Why-are-there-no-Roman-records-of-the-crucifixion-of-Jesus

Yep not 20 years as that guy in quora is claiming but 70 years minimum.
The death of Jesus I've never disputed, its the resurrection claim outside of Christianity claims at the time, not generations later.

 

[themickey]

Think about it, God has this marvelous plan, the resurrection.
But lets keep it secret, only a handful of cultists will I reveal it to and they are not going to say anthing.
But a 100 years after the event I'll let the next several generations of the cultist brigade shout it from the rooftops.

 

[studentofthemarkets]

I'm still checking out this post, but ...
OT salvation was through animal blood sacrifice.

GRACE salvation requires a belief that God's son died on the cross for our sins and rose from the dead. No one could have had this belief until after the ascension.

GRACE can mean the gospel; or it can mean the tradition use of the word. This may be where the confusion lies.

I think we are kind of saying the same thing, but I don't think I agree with this as you wrote it: "OT salvation was through animal blood sacrifice."

I think of it like this: pretty much all the Hebrews offered sacrifices....oh, wait, these were men offering sacrifices on behalf of their families, so the women didn't, and the children didn't. So, was it the action that saved? What about those that worshiped idols (as we know that the Israelites did, at time, have large number of people that committed idolatry)? If they worshiped idols while sacrificing, then the sacrifice itself wasn't going to cleanse them, right?

What I'm trying to say is that God looked on each heart. Now, what you wrote, is the action that God required, and if one HAD A RIGHT AND REPENTANT HEART TOWARD GOD, then that faith would follow through in the form of obeying God's command to offer the sacrifice. And that can be seen in the story of Cain and Abel. Abel's had faith in God and obeyed God's method of animal sacrifice. Cain wanted to worship God on his own terms and did not want to use an animal, which was one sign of his heart, that his heart was not in repentance and faith toward God.

Hebrews 10:11, 13, comparing the animal sacrifices to Jesus, in His role as both our Priest and Sacrifice:

Day after day every priest stands to minister and to offer again and again the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
But when this Priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, He sat down at the right hand of God.
​

I actually like this topic a lot, so if you disagree, I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say.

 

[studentofthemarkets]

Think about it, God has this marvelous plan, the resurrection.
But lets keep it secret, only a handful of cultists will I reveal it to and they are not going to say anthing.
But a 100 years after the event I'll let the next several generations of the cultist brigade shout it from the rooftops.

You just keep giving me more nonsense to put in my fact checking posts. Keep it up. In fact, please write more posts like these in the next 4 hours, if you really believe it, because it gives me more to work with.

 

[themickey]

You just keep giving me more nonsense to put in my fact checking posts. Keep it up. In fact, please write more posts like these in the next 4 hours, if you really believe it, because it gives me more to work with.

Nope only one search required, "which reliable source documented the resurrection at the time." (Not bible NT).
I mean, it's gotta be a big deal for God to show His creation a living Jesus whom we can all turn to.

 

[userque]

I think we are kind of saying the same thing, but I don't think I agree with this as you wrote it: "OT salvation was through animal blood sacrifice."

I think of it like this: pretty much all the Hebrews offered sacrifices....oh, wait, these were men offering sacrifices on behalf of their families, so the women didn't, and the children didn't. So, was it the action that saved? What about those that worshiped idols (as we know that the Israelites did, at time, have large number of people that committed idolatry)? If they worshiped idols while sacrificing, then the sacrifice itself wasn't going to cleanse them, right?

What I'm trying to say is that God looked on each heart. Now, what you wrote, is the action that God required, and if one HAD A RIGHT AND REPENTANT HEART TOWARD GOD, then that faith would follow through in the form of obeying God's command to offer the sacrifice. And that can be seen in the story of Cain and Abel. Abel's had faith in God and obeyed God's method of animal sacrifice. Cain wanted to worship God on his own terms and did not want to use an animal, which was one sign of his heart, that his heart was not in repentance and faith toward God.

Hebrews 10:11, 13, comparing the animal sacrifices to Jesus, in His role as both our Priest and Sacrifice:

Day after day every priest stands to minister and to offer again and again the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
But when this Priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, He sat down at the right hand of God.
​

I actually like this topic a lot, so if you disagree, I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say.

Right, the animal sacrifice was required, but so was repentance.

I didn't list repentance etc. because GRACE also requires having 'the right' heart. The blood sacrifice requirement was only applied in the OT and not during GRACE, and I was highlighting how they differed, OT vs GRACE salvation--how they are not the same; in addition to pointing out that grace--the gospel, is not the same as grace--the word.

Simply, I was saying, in response to your assertion that OT salvation was the same as GRACE salvation:

• Grace salvation requires admission that Jesus is the son of God, died on the cross for our sins, and rose again.
• OT salvation required, among other things (repentance, asking for forgiveness?, etc.?), a blood sacrifice.
• Grace salvation is not equivalent to when/where the word "grace" is used regarding the OT. While God's grace may have been involved in OT salvations, grace in that usage is not referencing the gospel of grace. That was still a mystery back then.

BTW, salvation requirements change again at the start of the tribulation.

Let me know if I've misunderstood something, or misstated something. I'm going by my memory right now

 

[studentofthemarkets]

Right, the animal sacrifice was required, but so was repentance.

I didn't list repentance etc. because GRACE also requires having 'the right' heart. The blood sacrifice requirement was only applied in the OT and not during GRACE, and I was highlighting how they differed, OT vs GRACE salvation--how they are not the same; in addition to pointing out that grace--the gospel, is not the same as grace--the word.

Simply, I was saying, in response to your assertion that OT salvation was the same as GRACE salvation:

• Grace salvation requires admission that Jesus is the son of God, died on the cross for our sins, and rose again.
• OT salvation required, among other things (repentance, asking for forgiveness?, etc.?), a blood sacrifice.
• Grace salvation is not equivalent to when/where the word "grace" is used regarding the OT. While God's grace may have been involved in OT salvations, grace in that usage is not referencing the gospel of grace. That was still a mystery back then.

BTW, salvation requirements change again at the start of the tribulation.

Let me know if I've misunderstood something, or misstated something. I'm going by my memory right now

I think that sounds about right. Yes, the animal sacrifices were required, but then, were they? Or was it the heart that God looked at? Ruth, the Moabitess, likely never offered a sacrifice, because I don't think women ever did offer them, and she was a foreigner, yet she wanted Naomi's God to be her God, and the entire book of Ruth is about her and she became the great-grandmother of King David, so I'm pretty sure she was "saved."

Sorry, I'm being difficult.

Also, what do you mean that salvation requirements change again at the start of the tribulation?

 

[studentofthemarkets]

PART ONE - FACT CHECKING @themickey

Using rough measures it was the 3rd generation after crucifiction that adults began to write about the 1-3 year of miracles and life of Jesus in supposed detail.
Now remember, they also wrote about his birth, so that's 130 years time lapse.
Think about it, it's like writing in detail about someone born in 1900, before the first world war, do you personally know the details of such a person?

The bible says Jesus claimed to be the Son of God.
Probably no such thing happened, that shit was made up a century later and stitched into a yarn the best snake oil salesman would be proud of.

Jesus had a very brief life span before it was snuffed out, very brief, 3 year ministry max.
So this guy probably did exist but 3 generations later they made him out as a cult figure, complete with miracles, bit like you might want to do in N Korea, venerate someone as god like.
And the cult continues on today.

In all 3 quotes above, @themickey has stated there was a very long time lapse between when Jesus died and when people began to write about him. @themickey very erroneously said, "it was the 3rd generation after crucifiction that adults began to write about the 1-3 year of miracles and life of Jesus in supposed detail."

The book of 1 Thessalonians was written about 51 CE and was written by the Apostle Paul.

c. 51 CE. One of the earliest of the genuine Pauline epistles.[76]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_the_Bible
​

This means that it was written only 18 years after Jesus death and resurrection, assuming that took place in 33 AD.

What can the book of 1Thessalonians tell us about what people believed about Jesus?

Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy,

To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:

Grace to you and peace.

The Thessalonians' Faith and Example
2 We give thanks to God always for all of you, constantly mentioning you in our prayers, 3 remembering before our God and Father your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ. 4 For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, 5 because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake. 6 And you became imitators of us and of the Lord, for you received the word in much affliction, with the joy of the Holy Spirit, 7 so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. 8 For not only has the word of the Lord sounded forth from you in Macedonia and Achaia, but your faith in God has gone forth everywhere, so that we need not say anything. 9 For they themselves report concerning us the kind of reception we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, 10 and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.
​

Just from the first chapter, we see that in only 18 short years, the Christianity had spread, not only the Thessalonians, but Macedonia and Achaia. Later in the book it mentions Philippi and Athens.

Most importantly, note that the message in verse 10 says that Jesus is God's son, that He was raised from the dead, and that it is Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

Chapter 2 shows Paul believed that he and the others that shared about Jesus with them did so with integrity. This is important, because it's not that Paul is declaring it to them, but saying that they knew this was true about these people.

Does this sound like it was "made up a century later and stitched into a yarn the best snake oil salesman would be proud of" as @themickey has told us it was?

9 For you remember, brothers, our labor and toil: we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, while we proclaimed to you the gospel of God.10 You are witnesses, and God also, how holy and righteous and blameless was our conduct toward you believers.11 For you know how, like a father with his children,12 we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory.
1 Thessalonians 2:9-12
​

This verse that they were imitating the churches in Judea. This is significant, because if their faith was in the same gospel of Jesus as the churches in Judea, then the resurrection of Jesus was widely believed in Judean churches. If this was written in 51 AD, then we have to realize that this means that Christians in Judea (Israel) were believing that Jesus rose from the dead long before 51 AD, putting it much, much closer to the time of the resurrection.

So much for @themickey's wild speculation that "3 generations later they made him out as a cult figure, complete with miracles."

14 For you, brothers, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea.
1 Thessalonians 2:14
​

Chapter 5 has another reference to Jesus rising from the dead:

13 But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.14 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep.
​

​

 

[studentofthemarkets]

PART TWO - FACT CHECKING @themickey

Using rough measures it was the 3rd generation after crucifiction that adults began to write about the 1-3 year of miracles and life of Jesus in supposed detail. Now remember, they also wrote about his birth, so that's 130 years time lapse. Think about it, it's like writing in detail about someone born in 1900, before the first world war, do you personally know the details of such a person?

The bible says Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. Probably no such thing happened, that shit was made up a century later and stitched into a yarn the best snake oil salesman would be proud of.

Jesus had a very brief life span before it was snuffed out, very brief, 3 year ministry max.So this guy probably did exist but 3 generations later they made him out as a cult figure, complete with miracles, bit like you might want to do in N Korea, venerate someone as god like.And the cult continues on today.

In addition to the book of 1 Thessalonians, the book of Galatians is another book that is accepted as a genuine Pauline epistle. It was likely written earlier, around 48 BC.

A majority of scholars agree that Galatians was written between the late 40s and early 50s,[10] although some date the original composition to c. 50–60
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Galatians

The South Galatian view holds that Paul wrote it during his first missionary journey, when he traveled throughout southern Galatia. This theory makes the letter quite early, perhaps 48 or 49 C.E. In this view Galatians may be the first of Paul's extant letters, even predating Thessalonians.
https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Galatians,_Epistle_to_the

https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Galatians,_Epistle_to_the
Virtually all scholars agree that Galatians is one of the most certain examples of Paul's own writing. The main arguments in favor of the authenticity of Galatians include its style and themes, which are common to the core letters of the Pauline corpus, and the historical connection to Acts of the Apostles. Moreover, Paul's description of the Council of Jerusalem (Gal 2:1–10) gives a different point of view than the description in Acts 15:2–29, whereas a forger writing in later decades would most likely have stuck close to the account in Acts to convince his audience that this was an authentic writing by Paul.​

Just for some perspective on the timeline of Paul's conversion, according to Britannica, Paul was converted about 33 CE. This would place his conversion very soon after Jesus' death and resurrection.

​

Although the exact date of his birth is unknown, he was active as a missionary in the 40s and 50s of the 1st century CE. From this it may be inferred that he was born about the same time as Jesus (c. 4 BCE) or a little later. He was converted to faith in Jesus Christ about 33 CE, and he died, probably in Rome, circa 62–64 CE.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Paul-the-Apostle​

Here are some things to note in the first chapter of Galatians:

1. The first sentence mentions that God the Father raised Him from the dead.

2. The letter is not to a single church, but to "the churches of Galatia" which means there was more than one. This would mean that there were likely many believers.

3. Verses 3 and 4 describe the substitutionary work of Jesus: "God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins"

4. In verse 11 Paul shares that he did not receive the gospel from people, but through the revelation of Jesus.

5. Verses 13 and 14 are interesting to me, because he assumes that his audience already knows this to be true, that Paul had previously persecuted the church. If Galatians was written in 48 AD, then there is only 15 years between 33 AD and it's writing. That amount of elapsed time is not anywhere close to @themickey's estimate that "So this guy probably did exist but 3 generations later they made him out as a cult figure, complete with miracles."

13 For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it. 14 And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.
​

6. Something else important is that although Paul received the gospel from direct revelation by Jesus, Paul also did meet with Peter and James. The gospel message is that Jesus died for our sins was buried and raised from the dead. So, it is not a different message from what the disciples of Jesus and early churches were already teaching.

18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days. 19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.​

7. Paul has a second encounter with Peter in chapter 2. Note that it is not the facts of Jesus death and resurrection that Paul has an issue with Peter about. That is important because it shows that they were on the same page as far as what the gospel message was. What Paul was upset about was a decision Peter made to not eat with Gentiles. Paul uses the truth of the gospel message, that we can assume Peter also believed, that is, that we are saved by faith in Jesus, to publicly confront Peter that his decision was hypocritical.

11 Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; 12 for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.​

14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews? 15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, 16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.​

17 “But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! 18 For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. 19 For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.”​

Here is the first chapter of Galatians (NKJV):

1 Paul, an apostle (not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead), 2 and all the brethren who are with me,

To the churches of Galatia:

3 Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, 5 to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.

Only One Gospel
6 I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.

10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ.

Call to Apostleship
11 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.

13 For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it. 14 And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, 16 to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.

Contacts at Jerusalem
18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days. 19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother. 20 (Now concerning the things which I write to you, indeed, before God, I do not lie.)

21 Afterward I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 22 And I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea which were in Christ. 23 But they were hearing only, “He who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith which he once tried to destroy.” 24 And they glorified God in me.
​