The gems of Revelation 21

Originally posted by whereu: ↑

"the evidence we have would still support evolution.
Some would like to crucify those who agree with this for blasphemy.
"Who would this be Whereu?
I didn't say that they would, but that they would like to. I hope that this is true in that they don't actually kill.
The answer is that quite a few who have had a go at me.
...and believe that I will be subject to hell for eternity.
That is what I call a big accusation.
They,the jews and Romans,still dont believe that Jesus was the literal son of God
Jews have their reason for this stand based on their interpretation of their sacred writings; Christians have their views based on their interpretation of scripture. I don't know what yours is.
It comes down to the interpretation of 2000 year old writings.
We know that religious conflict is based on the interpretation of 2000 year old writings.
So you may well be one of them yourself whereu?
I have posted on my interpretation of scripture which is more than Jesus being the Son of God. My interpretation by my understanding lines up with the CC version.
As an analogy, I understand South Africa's apartheid laws and the reasons for their creation but do not believe in them.
In summary, it is possible to understand something without believing in it.
---
The point that I was making is that Christians still argue over the nature of Jesus and have been known to kill over differences.
---
I hope that helps clarify my beliefs for you.

Expand

Who would this be Whereu?
I didn't say that they would, but that they would like to. I hope that this is true in that they don't actually kill.
The answer is that quite a few who have had a go at me.
...and believe that I will be subject to hell for eternity.
That is what I call a big accusation."

I fully understand the accusation,but this is a big accusation,again i ask you,who wants you killed thinks you will be subject to hell for eternity?
You said they would like too
Who?
Not a small thing to accuse people of

"They,the jews and Romans,still dont believe that Jesus was the literal son of God
Jews have their reason for this stand based on their interpretation of their sacred writings; Christians have their views based on their interpretation of scripture. I don't know what yours is."

Well we ve all discussed the sonship of christ and the trinity etc for years,so i dont know why you wouldnt know?

It comes down to the interpretation of 2000 year old writings.
We know that religious conflict is based on the interpretation of 2000 year old writings.
So you may well be one of them yourself whereu?
I have posted on my interpretation of scripture which is more than Jesus being the Son of God. My interpretation by my understanding lines up with the CC version."

Ok so you see the scriptures as a trinity and that Jesus wasnt the actual son of God.
So as i said before,you agree with the romans and the jews on their interpretation that he wasnt the son of God

For this reason,they crucified him.
This is historical fact
Josephus wrote about it
So did several writers of the books of the bible which are verified historical documents.

So i go back to your original statement

"The believers would still argue over Jesus and would probably crucify him again for blasphemy like they did last time."

And this is the point i made,i agree

So following that line of thought,even though you understand the issue ie like you do with apartheid,but do not believe in it.
You also said you agree with the Rcc point of view on this subject.
Which goes back to my original statement.
The Jews and Romans killed Jesus for blasphemy ,because he claimed the perogatives of God,claiming to be the son of God.
These beliefs still exist today of the Romans Rcc and the jews and christians that drny the sonship of Christ that he was killed for.
This is what this forums many discussions have flushed out over the years.
Those that hold the trinitarian view deny the literal sonship of Christ and agree with the Romans,as do those who hold the unitarian view,and the arian view as a created being.
You side with the roman interpretation although you dont believe etc.
So the point being ,the same beliefs which crucified christ in his day,still exist today.
That is the point.
The above beliefs dissagree with Christ foundational statement of matthew 16.16
On this foundation i will build my church,and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it
That i am the son of God.
"As an analogy, I understand South Africa's apartheid laws and the reasons for their creation but do not believe in them.
In summary, it is possible to understand something without believing in it."

As an atheist, i understand your position on this.
But this again reinforces which side people would be on if this issue were to happen today,and spiritually it still is,by peoples beliefs on this subject today,they are making a statement on what they will do with Christ.