[TruthTalk] Jesus of the Bible

[Dave Hansen]

Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave, it appears that you conveniently chose the similarities to focus on. DAVEH:   I chose 3.....two of which we agreed, and one that we did not.  I did it as a simple example to demonstrate a principle.  That I may or may not believe the things you say below to emphasize the differences in how we perceive the attributes of Jesus, it does not mean that we are not talking about the same Jesus of the Bible who died on a cross and was resurrected 3 days later.  To both of us....he is our Savior and Redeemer.      Rather than get into long involved discussions about the validity of each of your below points, let me point out that you are not defining Jesus as you perceive him, but rather your are trying to define him by telling us what you think he isn't.  How does that tell anybody what you believe to be the real Jesus, Perry?  You seem more intent on dealing me out of the game rather than explain what you believe about Jesus.     How do you know God does not have a spirit wife(s)???  Does the Bible tell you he does not?   How do you know Jesus' Father in Heaven does not have a body of flesh and bone?   Does the Bible say such?  Why do you think Jesus is not from Kolob?   Does you Bible say such?  If the Bible does not specifically say those things, then I assume you are offering opinions that may or may not be as valid as mine?  Rather than speculate on what you think Jesus is not, why don't you tell us what you believe based on what the Bible says.      For instance, I believe Jesus' Heavenly Father is a man, and I offer as evidence that the Bible tells us Jesus is the Son of man.  Now you may disagree with my understanding of that, but what Bible evidence would you offer to say that God is not a man?       As for Jesus not having genetic material, are you suggesting he did not?  The Bible doesn't say either way, I was just offering my opinion based on my belief that I believe Jesus is the Son of God....the literal Son of God.  If you don't believe such, that's OK Perry.   In this instance, I may believe more in the literalness of Jesus' sonship than you.  FTR....I don't recall any official doctrines of the LDS Church saying Jesus has genetic material of his Father.  That is my speculation, and I qualified it with a so to speak comment.  I don't think there is anything in the Bible to refute it....if so, I'm anxious to hear your argument.     As for your question #9, LDS theology teaches that Mary was a virgin in the traditional sense of never being with a man, as you put it.   While there may be a few (and I stress FEW) LDS folks who may have suggested otherwise, by far most (and I would put that at more than 99.99% of the membership) agrees with the official LDS position that she was a virgin prior to the birth of Jesus.  If you do not understand my emphatic explanation of that, and continue to mention such things in an attempt to discredit my beliefs, you will be doing yourself the same disservice as Kevin who stubbornly holds on to a lie to his own detriment.     So Perry, is the Jesus I believe died on the cross to bring us salvation through his grace the same Jesus you believe was crucified to bring you salvation?  What is not in the Bible is speculation.   What counts is the Jesus who is revealed in the Bible to be our Messiah.  Do you disagree?     Now Perry....we are back to the problem you presented when you accused me of being on TT to preach Mormonism.  You (and others) continue to bring up LDS related stuff and push it in my face.   As you know....there is no point in my discussing LDS stuff with you, considering your voiced intent is to denigrate anything to do with Mormonism.   However, do you want to discuss Jesus as he is presented in the Bible?   If so, that might make a meaningful discussion.  I will avoid bringing latter-day revelation into the discussion (except perhaps obliquely), and I would expect you not to bring post Biblical dogma like the Trinity Doctrine to the discussion.   Then we could look at Jesus simply as seen through the eyes of the Bible.  Does that appeal to you (or anybody else)?     I will change the subject line to reflect this new thread should anybody wish to pursue it.   And BTW.....I really have no idea of how it will turn out.  Without my LDS related extra-Biblical material, I may be up a creek without the proverbial paddle.   For anybody willing to engage me, I will endeavor to be polite and not give a sucker punch when and if the opportunity avails itself.  Likewise, I would expect those on the other side of the table to treat me as they would want to be treated.  Fair enough?   Any takers.......?      If so, I will state a few of the things I believe the Bible says about Jesus that I agree with...... 1.   Jesus existed in the pre-mortal existence and was foreordained to be the Savior 2.   Jesus was born of a virgin 3.  Jesus did not sin while in mortality 4.  Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected 3 days later. .......That seems like a simple start.  Does anybody disagree?  If so, present Biblical evidence and let's talk about it.  If you agree with all the above, what additional attributes do you believe about Jesus and I will offer my opinion in return.  In not too may posts, I suspect we will get into stuff where we don't agree, and then hopefully the discussion will provide some insightful thoughts.  I just implore anybody who gets involved to keep the discussion on the table and avoid getting down into the mud. Let me mention a few differences. 1. Is you jesus a procreated being from your god and one of his spirit wives? Not Mine. 2. Is your jesus the brother of Satan? Not mine. 3. Is the father of your jesus flesh and bones? not mine. 4. Was the father of your jesus once a man? Not mine. 5. Did the father of your jesus have a father? Not mine. 6. Id the father of your jesus from Kolob? not mine. 7. Did the father of your jesus have multiple spirit wives? not mine. 8. Are your jesus, and his father, and the holy spirit 3 gods? Not mine. 9. In the mormon paradigm, does virgin mean "young girl", or "never been with a man"? 10. Where in the Bible does it say god's genetic material ended up in mary? Where does it even say god HAS genetic material. Dave, in my opinion (and evidently in the opinoin of many) they are not the same. You have said it yourself...all false religions contain some of the truth...mormonism is no exception. Perry From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Belief Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 22:03:05 -0700 * the onus is on us to prove him to not be the same as our Jesus.* DAVEH:   Perhaps I should have explained myself a bit better, Perry.   What I was objecting to was your above comment.  I don't see where it is anybody's job to denigrate, berate or disqualify another's belief about Jesus.   Regardless what you may think I believe or not believe about Jesus....My Jesus is my Savior, just as he is your Savior.    As I see it....you, Kevin, Lance or any other person (Christian or not) can explain their belief in Jesus as they perceive him.   Then I (or anybody else) can agree that I believe the same way, or not.   For instance....    FWIW....I may be wrong in my assumptions of what you believe about the following, but follow along to get a feel for what I am trying to say: 1)  I assume you believe Jesus was born of a virgin mother.  I believe the same. 2)  As I understand it, you believe Jesus was conceived by the Holy Ghost.   I do not.   I believe he is literalerally the Son of God, being conceived of the genetic (if that is the correct term) material of our Heavenly Father by the power of the Holy Ghost. 3)  You believe Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected 3 days later.   I believe the same.    Now, the above is a somewhat simplistic example, but I think it illustrates the point.  On two of the three points we agree.  On one we disagree.  Does that mean that we believe in two totally different Saviors?   Not in my opinion.    You are probably asking what this has to do with the original discussion.  The point I am trying to make is that if you were to single out my believe that Jesus is the literal Son of God as evidence that I believe in a different Jesus than you do.....well.....you might have to say that I believe the Bible too much when I quote a myriad of passages supporting my perspective view about Jesus.  Does the fact that we might have two different perspectives about Jesus' paternal attributes mean that we are talking about two different people?   If not....then what point is there in trying to prove what the person believes is wrong.   It doesn't change the fact that we are still talking about Jesus who was born of a virgin and died on a cross in our behalf.    Now....If you said you believed in the Jesus who died on the cross and was resurrected, and I said I believed in the Jesus who sold tacos in Mexico.....then it becomes obvious that we are talking about different; people.  You would not have to prove anything about my Jesus being the wrong one.   There would be nothing in common between them to tie them together.    Yikes....I think I'm rambling on now.   I hope I adequately explained why I said what I did.  If you want clarification, just ask. Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave,   Wait a minute! I agree with you and then you tell me I have it backwards? How does that work?   You said, "Logically, the onus is not upon me to define the Jesus I believe in, but rather it is on the person who suggests I don't believe in Jesus."   I responded, "I think you are right. You are entitled to your jesus, and the onus is on us to prove him to not be the same as our Jesus."   And now you say, "You've got that a bit backwards, Perry."   Aren't you in essence, then saying that YOU had it a bit backwards since I was agreeing with you? Perry From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Belief Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:25:39 -0700 DAVEH:   You've got that a bit backwards, Perry.   The onus is on you to prove (explain might be a better word) your Jesus.....I don't recall seeing much of that on TT.....other than he created the world, was born of a virgin, died and was resurrected.....all of which I believe.   Is there more you (TTers) want to say about your belief about Jesus? Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave,   I think you are right. You are entitled to your jesus, and ** I feel we have done that. Repeatedly. But, you do not accept our evidence, and I suppose short of having a vision, you never will.   You have not said our Jesus is a false jesus because, since you say you beleive in the same Jesus we believe in, that would be like shooting yourself in the foot. Perry From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Belief Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 21:55:30 -0700 DAVEH:   Logically, the onus is not upon me to define the Jesus I believe in, but rather it is on the person who suggests I don't believe in Jesus.  FTR....I have not said that the Jesus Kevin, you Perry or any other TTer believes in is a false Jesus. Lance Muir wrote: DaveH says "Kevin, I believe in Jesus." IFF we are going to engage in a conversation that entails reality, then we have to continue to build upon that which has been said previously.According to you THE JESUS TO BE BELIEVED IN IS MOST FULLY AND ACCURATELY DESCRIBED WITHIN MORMON TEACHING. Is this so? The Jesus believed in by Kevin, Perry, Lance et al is a false Jesus. Is this not also so? (unwieldy but, you get my point)What, IYO, are the eternal consequenses for non-Mormons?  Mr. Moderator:Please grant DaveH the opportunity of fully answering and, explaining.     DAVEH:  FTR Kevin, I believe in Jesus.   Therefore can we conclude     that you've made the judgment rather than God? -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.