Why Believe in Christianity over all other religions?

[medicforlife]

Why should anyone trust in Christianity over Islam, Buddhism, Mormonism, or anything else? It is because there are absolute truths, because only in Christianity is there accurate fulfilled prophecies of a coming Messiah. Only in Christianity do we have the extremely accurate transmission of the eyewitness documents (gospels) so we can trust what was originally written. Only in Christianity do we have the person of Christ who claimed to be God, performed many miracles to prove His claim of divinity, who died and rose from the dead, and who said that He alone was the way the truth and the life (John 14:6). All this adds to the legitimacy and credibility of Christianity above all other religions -- all based on the person of Jesus. If follows that if it is all true about what Jesus said and did, then all other religions are false because Jesus said that He alone was the way, the truth, and the life and that no one comes to the Father except through Him (John 14:6). It could not be that Jesus is the only way and truth and other religions also be the truth.

Either Jesus is true and all other religions are false or other religions are true and Jesus is false. There are no other options.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by medicforlife

Why should anyone trust in Christianity over Islam, Buddhism, Mormonism, or anything else? It is because there are absolute truths, because only in Christianity is there accurate fulfilled prophecies of a coming Messiah. Only in Christianity do we have the extremely accurate transmission of the eyewitness documents (gospels) so we can trust what was originally written. Only in Christianity do we have the person of Christ who claimed to be God, performed many miracles to prove His claim of divinity, who died and rose from the dead, and who said that He alone was the way the truth and the life (John 14:6). All this adds to the legitimacy and credibility of Christianity above all other religions -- all based on the person of Jesus. If follows that if it is all true about what Jesus said and did, then all other religions are false because Jesus said that He alone was the way, the truth, and the life and that no one comes to the Father except through Him (John 14:6). It could not be that Jesus is the only way and truth and other religions also be the truth.

Either Jesus is true and all other religions are false or other religions are true and Jesus is false. There are no other options.

Mormonism is a branch of Christianity, faggot.

*Reply reserved for future puntage*

[medicforlife]

I'm not a faggot as you say. Obviously you cannot have a converstation without casting insults. So here is one for you: You are a pitiful, mentally backward Neanderthal who suffers from a severe vitamin deficiency that has obviously retarded your intellectual development.

Now for real, I'm just kidding you. Help me understand why Mormanism is a branch of Christianity when the teachings of the Mormans contradict the Bible?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by medicforlife

Now for real, I'm just kidding you. Help me understand why Mormanism is a branch of Christianity when the teachings of the Mormans contradict the Bible?

The Bible itself contradicts itself many a time. Mormonism draws off the teachings of the Bible, albeit not very well.

[medicforlife]

Originally Posted by Azure

Mormonism draws off the teachings of the Bible, albeit not very well.

You are correct that Mormons frequently misrepresent scripture and take verses out of context to make it say what they want. Those who do not know what the Bible really teaches will easily be fooled. For example, when the Bible says that there are no other gods besides God (Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8), Mormons quickly add "of this world." That means that there really are other gods out there and that the Bible is talking only about this world and not about others. They often quote 1 Cor. 8:5-6 which mentions the existence of other gods. But when doing this, they fail to read exactly what it says, that there are "so-called gods." In other words, they are called gods, but really are not gods. Paul was speaking about false gods, not the true and living God.

Do you want to trust Morman teaching when even you admit that they do not draw off the teachings of the Bible very well? Just curious?

btw...here are some other areas of concern that do not follow the Bible.

The true gospel was lost from the earth. Mormonism is its restoration, Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R. McConkie, p. 635. They teach there was an apostasy and the true church ceased to exist on earth.
There are many gods, Mormon Doctrine, p. 163.
There is a mother god, Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 443.
God used to be a man on another planet, Mormon Doctrine, p. 321. Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, Vol 5, pp. 613-614; Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, Vol 2, p. 345, Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333.
After you become a good Mormon, you have the potential of becoming a god, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pages 345-347, 354.

[Iehovah]

Originally Posted by medicforlife

Only in Christianity do we have the extremely accurate transmission of the eyewitness documents (gospels) so we can trust what was originally written.

Prove it. You have nobody to verify that they were accurate - to an extreme or otherwise.

Only in Christianity do we have the person of Christ who claimed to be God, performed many miracles to prove His claim of divinity, who died and rose from the dead, and who said that He alone was the way the truth and the life (John 14:6).

You have proof that there was a guy named Jesus, that's all.

Either Jesus is true and all other religions are false or other religions are true and Jesus is false. There are no other options.

Option number 3 is that all of them are wrong. Jesus being real is irrelevant to whether Jesus had divine powers or was the voice of god.

[medicforlife]

Originally Posted by Iehovah

Prove it. You have nobody to verify that they were accurate - to an extreme or otherwise.



You have proof that there was a guy named Jesus, that's all.



Option number 3 is that all of them are wrong. Jesus being real is irrelevant to whether Jesus had divine powers or was the voice of god.

There is a lot of info to put into a post like this. Following is a list of extra-biblical (outside of the Bible) references of biblical events, places, etc. The list is not exhaustive but is very representative of what is available. More information is available regarding manuscipts that I have not put in this post.

Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?, a Jewish historian) mentions John the Baptist and Herod - Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 5, par.

Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions Jesus - Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 3, par. 3.

Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions James, the brother of Jesus - Antiquities, Book 20, ch. 9.

Flavius Josephus (AD 37?-101?) mentions Ananias the High Priest who was mentioned in Acts 23:2

Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian) mentions "Christus" who is Jesus - Annals 15.44

Pliny the Younger mentioned Christ. Pliny was governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. Pliny wrote ten books. The tenth around AD 112.

The Talmud
"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favor he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!"

Lucian (circa 120-after 180) mentions Jesus. Greek writer and rhetorician.

You will have to read these for yourself. I can't quote all of them here.

[Iehovah]

Originally Posted by medicforlife

... snipped lots of proof that these people existed...

Thanks for making my point for me. I don't doubt that these people existed at all. So did the Prophet Mohammad. It doesn't prove they did anything miraculous.

As for the "eyewitness accounts" of the Bible, catch a clue. The Bible isn't the equivalent of CNN - those "gospels" are simply the writings of people who knew and interacted with Jesus - writings that were reviewed, examined for acceptable content, and assembled on the decision of those that ultimately decided exactly which books would or would not constitute the Old and New Testaments.

[medicforlife]

As for the "eyewitness accounts" of the Bible, catch a clue. The Bible isn't the equivalent of CNN

Thank goodness...The fact is that the Bible has not been rewritten. Take the New Testament, for example. The disciples of Jesus wrote the New Testament in Greek and though we do not have the original documents, we do have around 6,000 copies of the Greek manuscripts that were made very close to the time of the originals. These various manuscripts, or copies, agree with each other to almost 100 percent accuracy. Statistically, the New Testament is 99.5% textually pure. That means that there is only 1/2 of 1% of of all the copies that do not agree with each other perfectly. But, if you take that 1/2 of 1% and examine it, you find that the majority of the "problems" are nothing more than spelling errors and very minor word alterations. For example, instead of saying Jesus, a variation might be "Jesus Christ." So the actual amount of textual variation of any concern is extremely low.

those "gospels" are simply the writings of people who knew and interacted with Jesus - writings that were reviewed, examined for acceptable content, and assembled on the decision of those that ultimately decided exactly which books would or would not constitute the Old and New Testaments

You must be referring to the "lost books" of the Bible. From cults to the New Age, people make all sorts of claims about how the Bible is missing books, books that help justify what they hope to believe. Sometimes people claim that the Bible was edited to take out reincarnation, or the teaching of higher planes of existence, or different gods, or ancestor worship, or "at-one-ment" with nature.
The "lost books" were never lost. They were known by the Jews in Old Testament times and the Christians of the New Testament times and were never considered scripture. They weren't lost nor were they removed. They were never in the Bible in the first place.

The additional books were not included in the Bible for several reasons. They lacked apostolic or prophetic authorship, they did not claim to be the Word of God; they contain unbiblical concepts such as prayer for the dead in 2 Macc. 12:45-46; or have some serious historical inaccuracies.

[PirateJoe]

Originally Posted by Iehovah

Thanks for making my point for me. I don't doubt that these people existed at all. So did the Prophet Mohammad. It doesn't prove they did anything miraculous.

As for the "eyewitness accounts" of the Bible, catch a clue. The Bible isn't the equivalent of CNN - those "gospels" are simply the writings of people who knew and interacted with Jesus - writings that were reviewed, examined for acceptable content, and assembled on the decision of those that ultimately decided exactly which books would or would not constitute the Old and New Testaments.

Not even! The gospels were most likely written by non-eyewitnesses years after Jesus' death!