Jimmer

"...The Bible is literally filled with detailed prophecies that have been fulfilled with 100% accuracy." Would someone please give me an example of one of these prophesies...

This is not going to sit well with a lot of you, but I'm asking that you read this from a practical rather than an emotional standpoint. I am not questioning what happened to Jesus (Yes, I believe that he lived), and I am not questioning the degree to which he was tortured. But in light of the fact that it is considered by some to be greatest sacrifice the world has ever known, I just want to ask exactly *what* the sacrifice was...

As horrific as being nailed to a cross is, I submit that there have been many instances of HUMAN suffering that were far worse than an afternoon hanging from a cross. I'd submit for review, a couple of YEARS in a concentration camp, for example.

Is this an account that, as children, we grew up to believe was the most horrific thing any person could endure? Let's consider what's written:

1. Jesus was GOD in human form - subject to suffering, yes, but knew exactly what was going to happen

2. Jesus knew that he wasn't REALLY going to die, but would resurrect in two days

3. It was all over in ONE weekend...

I'm just wondering about the degree of suffering. How many Auschwitz victims would have traded places with Him for that kind of treatment? ALL of them, probably...?

Let the fur fly... I welcome thoughtful replies, but expect none...

> Jimmer <

I won't subject you to the entire clip... just the funny part - I use it as my ringtone for my guitar buddy, best friend, and active Christian...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRB8Jor8tPs

The clip has to do with Charlie the Unicorn NOT believing there's such thing as Candy Mountain... enjoy

> Jimmer <

What would he have to say or do? Would it depend on how he made you 'feel'? Would he have a particular look? Would he have to perform a miracle to your satisfaction? Could you be fooled? Why or why not?

How does one differentiate between the passages in Leviticus that spell out penalties for eating shellfish, touching the skin of a pig, wearing fabrics from dissimilar fibers, etc from the ones you HATE about a 'man lying with another man'. If we are not bound by the Old Testament, how come you still pick out a few verses to take personally and literally?

OK, we've all read the verse (along with a lot of others that Christians like to ignore or dismiss), so what does the Church say about 'nocturnal emissions', otherwise known as 'wet dreams'? The verse talks about 'spilling seed', so is the admonition against waste or pleasuring oneself? Does the same restriction apply to females? To make things even more complex, the body is sometimes so disconnected from desire that there are known cases where women have orgasmed during rape. What does God say about all these 'unintentional violations' of the regs?

The only way I've seen this objected to is when you tack on the word 'damn' after his name. But what does it really mean?

Is wrong because you are usurping God's power by requesting that He send someone to an eternity of torture? Well, denominations do that all the time when they tell people where they're going for their different interpretations of scripture.

Is it because you are presuming to tell the Lord what to do by suggesting where a person should go before He gets around to sending them there? Not only presumptuous, but if that's the case, then saying God BLESS you is every bit as arrogant. HE'S the God... let him GOD...

I assume I'm going to get a lot of amusing answers to this - and I welcome them. But if anyone wants to lend a serious comment on this curious practice of getting upset when people 'give God a last name', but DON'T get upset, when is name in invoked in other ways, I'd be happy to hear it. Full points awarded to the most interesting answer - amusing or otherwise.

...didn't you thank them rather than hate them? By killing Christ (His stated purpose for coming to earth in the first place was to die for your sins), the Jews provided you with your ticket to Heaven... Discuss...

Those familiar with the subject will know that this is not an original question. It was one that was asked by Princeton's Dr Gerard O'Neill of his physics students back in the early '70's. Surprisingly, the research convinced him that the answer was NO - and prompted him to write a book, 'The High Frontier', where he postulated the creation of massive space habitats rather than search for earth-like planets circling stars scores of light years away. Not only is practical interstellar travel still a pipe dream for today's best minds, Dr O'Neill showed that proper emphasis (and funding) could enable us to solve our future overpopulation problems using off-the-shelf technology. I'm interested in hearing what you think. The ten points goes to the answer, pro or con, that's most convincing as to the efficacy of his ideas.