FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 

Jesus... the Man.
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TimAllen.com Forum Index -> The Really Big Questions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1080
Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I won't argue with your premise. There, indeed, are many outstanding people in history who have done the very same. Many times I found myself often wondering if there was a Jesus, a God because there was always something horrible and unjust in my lifeI was going through. Not a day has gone by that there wasn't something I could curse God for and ask WHY, God? Why me?

I can't put down psychics either, because I found to have been blessed or cursed with similar powers. Not like Sylvia Browne's, mind you, but I have often found preachers sorely lacking in understanding when they call such powers and gifts, gifts of the devil. If a devil does exist, I know I wouldn't be on his side or willingly team up with him, although there are plenty of people out there in the world I would like to do some goodly damage to for what they've have done to me and to others and the world in this life, but haven't as yet because I'm just not like that.

And what of all the pain and suffering that's going on now? Everyone can agree that if there were a God and He was that good a divine being there wouldn't be such pain and agony and suffering in the world as we have today.

But there is just one thing I can't seem to wrap myself around these days--watching California going up in smoke these last few hours and hearing someone this morning believing they have an arson out there who set them--after all these years asking why, why--beating my head against the wall, trying to figure it all out and never coming up with an absolute answer--yes or no, man. Are you out there? Do you really exist? That God doesn't exist and never has. That question is no longer in my bones, nor do I have a compelling wish to think that way any longer because I know now differently. I cannot shake the knowledge I have acquired in my many years of existence--that God truly does exist and Jesus is his Messiah. And if someone asked me to deny them, I don't think I could because it's just not possible for me to do so anymore.

All it took for me to learn that tiny bit of truth was one night in the hospital keeping vigil at the side of my mom's bed and hearing a voice in my head tell me I will give you proof! and then told me when my mother would die--that she would die in the next year, with enough time to spare to do legally what must be done. And even though I worried then about our finances and how were my sister and I going to pay all the expenses, I was told not to worry because there would be enough money in this transaction, mother's death, to pay what bills remained.

Maybe even after this you will not believe, but that is purely up to you. I can't learn it for you. I can't seek out the definite answers for you. That is for you and you alone to find for yourself--as it is with everyone who has ever lived and breathed on this earth. But learning the definitive answer in such a powerful way surely blows everything else out of the water when it comes to you like this:

Being all alone with your mother watching her slowly die a horrible, painful death. Pumped up with painkillers, morphine, she awakes in a frantic worry about needing to sign some papers and trying to get out of her bed to do it. The next thing I see her do is tell me there is a man standing outside at the door. I look and there is no man. She is telling me this man is telling her she must sign some papers, but he won't tell her his name. I tell her not to worry. I will sign the papers, and I will deal with the man. She then falls back to sleep never to awaken again.

It was ten minutes after midnight, on a January 1st my mother had passed away. Our funeral director came to us with papers telling us to sign them and we would be able to release her last Social Security check, because of the timing of her death it was legally hers and ours. We could have the money to finish paying the last of the expenses on her funeral and other outstanding bills that we had incurred from her illness.

That night I went home full of astonishment and wonder. How could I believe? But it was true. All of it as the voice had told me. And to this day I still believe the man who had come to visit my mother was Jesus himself.

But like I said. I cannot persuade you. No one can. You have to find the answers for yourself as we all do in our own way. If you WANT to believe, but can't find anything to help you believe, when you are alone, just try this experiment and see if it doesn't produce. Ask the universe this guestion, "God, if you really do exist out there somewhere, please help me to know it for myself, without anymore questions or doubts in my mind. A way that will truly convince me so that there is never again any more doubt in my mind or in my heart."

I will let you also in on a little secret. He also told me that if there's any doubt first ask this question--even do the research for yourself if you must. Many have performed miracles like Jesus, but there is only one miracle only one has performed successfully--Jesus--all of them may have resurrected from the grave on their own, but only one has ever resurrected another--Jesus. Check it out . I think the voice in my head has a point to make from the historical documents we have as Americans, whether religious or not, at our fingertips for mass consumption--one is the Bible.

And when you next take a look out your window or your door at all the horror or damage or evil that is out there, ask yourself this question, if God made the world so beautiful and pristine--so perfect--would He, could He be this heartless and cruel with HIS creation--or is there someone or something else hellbent on destroying such beautiful artwork as HIS?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is good to hear you have found what you are looking for. I assume then the search is over?....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 6:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 5207
Location: Brackwater Swamp

PostPosted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 3:07 pm    Post subject: My Two Cents.......Again Reply with quote

Hello angelmikaheal. I know george carlin uses profanity alot, still I watched almost five minutes of that video before he got too filthy and disgusting for me to continue. I once said there is now enough documented evidence for a person to believe anything they want, and it's true. I know people are angry about the religious money takers on tv, and they should be, because what they teach is not biblical at all.

Jesus is real. I can't prove it to anyone though, because it is a divine revelation that only God can give. I've shared my faith somewhat on this site, and have ended up in several debate/arguements over it. Not only that, in my trying to explain what I believe, when I've glanced at a few of my old posts on this subject, it kind of sounds like I'm giving someone traffic directions, like, how to cross the street safely......which I now think is funny.

I do believe people find what they are really looking for, spiritually, and they do receive the desires of their hearts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lunar Hotel

Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 350

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:28 am    Post subject: Arrrrrrrgh. So Yer Sayin' There Ain't No Santy Clause? Reply with quote

LadyHawke wrote:
I won't argue with your premise.

The theological implications alone are quite staggering. . .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 15 Aug 2008
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:32 pm    Post subject: Re: My Two Cents.......Again Reply with quote

artist wrote:
I know george carlin uses profanity alot...... he got too filthy and disgusting for me.... people are angry about the religious money takers on tv, and they should be, because what they teach is not biblical at all.

Jesus is real. . .

He who laughs last...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Posts: 6
Location: Mansfield, Texas

PostPosted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:34 pm    Post subject: Was Jesus a Man? Reply with quote

Mr. Allen,

I would like to attempt to answer your question through an explanation that provides references from the Bible. I will try and keep this short and without inferences that will offend others of various beliefs.

First of all I must clarify that I believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God the Father, two separate and distinct members of the Family of God, the Creator.

The Roman Emperor Constantine did not deify Jesus Christ. God the Father accomplished that task when He resurrected Jesus Christ from the dead. The Son of God existed with the Father before the creation of man. This is easily explained by the first chapter of John. The “Word” or logos in the original Greek, simply means discourse, but can also be translated as, speaker or spokesman. Place this in context with the scripture where Jesus says,

“And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.” (John 5:37).

If we have not heard the Father’s voice, then whose voice did Moses hear when he was spoken to out of the burning bush? Remember, Moses was told to remove his shoes because he was standing on HOLY ground. The ground was holy because the presence of God was in that place. It was not however the presence of God the Father but of the Son who was later born as Jesus Christ. There are numerous other proof texts in the Bible that can support that Jesus existed in Spirit form before being born as a man, but space limits them being quoted here.

The Son of God divested himself of his Divine position as the only sole inheritor of creation (Kingdom of God) for our sakes. Jesus Christ lived his life as an example of what the Law of God was written to teach.

“Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto the first, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matthew 22:37-40).

Jesus is telling us that all of the Old Testament, “the law and the prophets,” was written as God’s attempt to teach mankind how to do those two simple tasks, love God and your fellowman.” Love means doing what is right by them and for them. Right by God means obedience. Right by man means compassion and respect.

The problem with our failure to always adhere to these laws is that our human nature often gets in the way. As physical human beings our physical desires are at war with the desires of God which are Spiritual desires. We must learn to place the well being of others before ourselves (hence Christ’s example). If we desire to be like him we must also do as he did while on the Earth. Jesus Christ ALWAYS obeyed his Father, did His will, and treated people with compassion. God Our Father, just as any human father would, desires that we, his children be happy, and that we OBEY him. As a human parent, do you not believe that you know what is best for your children and therefore set down rules for them so that they will be happy and safe? God is no different. He is the Creator and as creator and designer of human beings he also knows what is best for us, what will keep us happy and safe, and most importantly, what will allow us to inherit eternity.

Now back to the original question. Jesus Christ was resurrected to reassume his place at the right hand of the Father, and await the time that he would be sent back to this earth to complete his ministry. That time may soon be upon us, but, only God the Father knows when that day will actually arrive. Jesus Christ was reinstated into the position he held before he voluntarily allowed himself to be born as a human being for the purpose of exemplifying the type of life that we must lead in order to be worthy to become coinheritors of God’s kingdom. Constantine was a pagan Roman Emperor who believed in the worship of the sun as did a majority of the Roman citizens that comprised his empire.

Constantine is famous for one thing. Of his own accord, he changed the law of God (4th commandment) from worshipping God on the seventh day Sabbath to the first day of Sunday. He did this under the pretense of adopting Christianity. As stated earlier a large number of Rome’s citizens were sun worshippers. Constantine wanted to convert to Christianity, at the urging of his wife, but he did not want to upset a majority of his citizens which might have caused his overthrow. Therefore he, Constantine, compromised, and combined the worship of Christ with pagan sun worship. I must reinforce that God did not make this command a man, Constantine, did.

Since that time Constantine has been given credit for “deifying” or popularizing Jesus Christ, but that certainly was not necessary. God the Father was ensuring that those he was calling were aware of Christ and believed in the True Jesus Christ. After all, they, those God was calling, i.e., Christians were dying in large numbers, for their beliefs, in the arenas!

Jesus Christ was a man but he was no ORDINARY man. He was imbued, without measure, with the Holy Spirit. He was God in the flesh. God IS the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the substance of what God is comprised. If the Holy Spirit resides within us then we are identified that we are of God.

But, what Jesus also accomplished while on earth is to prove that it is possible for a physical man to live a life of compassion for others and at the same time, obey God! He, Jesus, lived a sinless life. What is sin? The answer once again is in the Bible. “Sin is the transgression of the law.” (1 John 3:4). If it were not possible for us to live the example of Christ, then I would say that we are all “most miserable.” But, Jesus did nothing that we could not accomplish ourselves including the miracles (which many of the Apostles performed as well). We fail at the miracles simply because our faith is not strong enough. We are not able to be as perfect as Christ, because he was a man full of the Holy Spirit. But, we are expected to try our best, and when we fail, repent, ask forgiveness through Jesus Christ, and then try again. As long as we humble ourselves and repent (a true repentance, not jail house repentance) and ask for forgiveness, we will be forgiven. The road to salvation is not an easy one; Jesus said so himself.

These words may be difficult for some to accept. The discussion about Constantine is available in the history books. The rest… well, I quoted scripture didn’t I? Another reason that these words may be difficult for some to understand is John 6:44. “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:44). Christ is saying that God, the Father, must lead you to Christ. It requires a miracle of God, opening your mind, to understand His Word. Neither I nor any other human being can make anyone understand God’s word unless God has first opened that person’s mind.

The meaning of life is simple. God is creating a family. He has so much love that he wants a BIG family. He wants to share all that he has with all of us. But, first we must qualify to inherit his kingdom. The great news is that no one is lost unless they want to be lost. All who have ever been born will be resurrected to life and will have an opportunity to understand who God and Jesus Christ really are, what they represent, and what they intend for all of us.

Many people are confused and rightfully so. They don’t know what happens when they die because they have not always heard the truth. Most believe that they go of to some paradise or to some everlasting place of torment. Is that really a loving God; a God that would allow someone to suffer for eternity, sizzling on some demons skewer over a BBQ? That answer is also simple and available to anyone who desires to search for it. I hope I have not confused you or anyone else who reads these words. Hopefully this will pique yours or their curiosity and force them to open their Bibles and prove for themselves what I have written here.

I didn’t mean for this to drag on so long, but I guess I got carried away. Mr. Allen, I intend this as an answer to your original question and not as a format for argument. I will certainly answer any question you or anyone else poses to me, but I am already firmly convicted in my faith. I am convicted because I have proven these things with my own eyes from the Bible and have not taken the word of any man. I hope that others will do the same and not take my word, but read for themselves.

Take care,

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 8:00 am    Post subject: Jesus Christ - both God and man long before Constantine Reply with quote

I mean no disrespect but I do not know how you can ask if it was Constantine who deified Jesus....have you ever read the New Testament? Jesus was clearly considered deity 400 years before Constantine. Jesus was considered deity by the New Testament writers themselves! It is dripping on almost every page with the fact that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh.

From the opening verses of the book of John:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it. There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.
He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' " From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known."

Again, the apostle John, later in life writes in his second epistle (letter): "Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist." - 2John 1:7

The apostle Peter also testifies: "We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain." - 2Peter 1:16-18

You see, to declare one the "Son of God" was to declare them equal to God or God himself. Jesus' enemies understood this:
Jesus himself said,
"I and the Father are one.
Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him,
but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?"
"We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God." - John 10:30-34

The Jews insisted, "We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God." - John 19:7

"Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, "Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?" But Jesus remained silent.
The high priest said to him, "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God."
"Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."
Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, "He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?"
"He is worthy of death," they answered." - Matt 26:62-66

And consider that the apostle Paul taught the same thing that Jesus was diety:

"Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father." - Philippians 2:5-11

In Colossians, Paul testifies, "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross." - Colossians 1:15-20

And Paul continues, "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form" - Colossians 2:9

The Hebrews writer says,
"And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,
"Let all God's angels worship him." In speaking of the angels he says,
"He makes his angels winds,
his servants flames of fire." But about the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy." - Hebrews 1:6-9

So Tim, you see, it was not Constantine who "deified" Jesus, he was 400 years too late--it was the apostles who deified Him. But just as Jesus was 100% God, He was also 100% man! That is the point of John 1:14-

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us." And that is why the world is still reeling from this event 2000 years ago.

"Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham's descendants. For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted." - Hebrews 2:14-18

"Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need. - Hebrews 4:14-16

This is the difference between Christianity all all other world religions. All other religions are founded by human teachers. Buddha was not God in the flesh. Muhammed was not God in the flesh. Jesus was the only one ever to make such a claim. And to back it up, He was raised from the dead so we could know it is true. The resurrection gives validity to everything He said.

Now it is pointless for anyone to say "Jesus was just a good teacher." Would a "good religious teacher" make the following claim it he were good and it were not true?
"Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." - John 14:6

Unless that statement is true, then Jesus is just a deceiver and a liar! You can't have it both ways. Jesus is good AND God ...or he is the devil in disguise.

You asked, "What condition would the Christian world be in if it was true that Jesus was also a man just as us? Would that have minimized the impact of his words?"

The answer is that Jesus was a man just like us....and that is exactly what gives the gospel such power! Had He not been a man, we would still be in our sins.


Last edited by jeffmcf on Sun Jan 18, 2009 3:32 pm; edited 6 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Posts: 6
Location: Mansfield, Texas

PostPosted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do not believe that Tim was implying that Constatine definitely diefied Jesus Christ, but was rather looking for a convincing response to the negative or positive, possibly because he was not convinced that was the case.

We must remember that an individual must be invited by God to understand the truth about Jesus Christ, (John 6:44), and that we must be open to conviction. God and Jesus Christ are of one mind. "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever." If God and Jesus are of one mind that means that they have only one WAY of life, not 46,343 different ways of worship.

Many people are intrigued about the word of God. Some are interested for a short time, others for a longer period, and still others are convicted for life, hence the example of the parable of the sower. It is not enough to just believe on Jesus Christ, you must also obey him and follow his example. "The devils believe and tremble." But, they do not obey God nor do they follow his example.

If your stock broker tells you, if you invest in a certain stock you will make a million dollars overnight, do you just believe him or do you prove your belief by acting on his advice? It is the same with God. Many people profess to believe in God and Jesus Christ, but they do not obey them.

As a parent do you just tell your children the rules of the house not really caring if they obey you, or do you tell them the rules because you know that by obeying them they will lead happy properous lives? It is the same with God who is our Father (creator) in heaven. Why do so many think that God, as our parent, would give us his rules (laws) of life, yet not expect us to follow them. Jesus Christ proved that it is possible for a man (or woman) to be human and still obey God's laws. Is it easy? Of course not. But, neither is anything else easy that is worth attaining in life.

Most people on this earth do not understand the REAL truth, but have been sold a bill of goods by individuals masquerading as servants of God.

Hang in their Mr. Allen. Keep searching. "For every one that asks receives; and he that seeks finds; and to him that knocks it shall be opened." (Matthew 7:Cool. He wasn't talking about food, clothes, and worldly possessions. He was speaking about the knowledge of the truth. But, always we must ask with a humble, [i]unassuming and repentant [/i]mind.

Take care,

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:25 am    Post subject: Re: Jesus... the Man. Reply with quote

TimAllen wrote:
Was the Emperor Constantine responsible for the deification of Jesus? Jesus was both the Prophet and the Messenger, but what condition would the Christian world be in if it was true that Jesus was also a man just as us? Would that have minimized the impact of his words?

Well, well...

I stumbled across this place quite by accident. Well, OK... not totally by accident. Truth is I'm a shameless Tim fan (not in a creepy way) and also a graphic designer, and I was sat there appreciating Tim's website and my mouse just slipped and clicked on this link, and here I was.

I was immediately impressed by the 'in with both feet' approach that Tim has to subjects which presumably he has an interest in but which are often deemed to be 'off topic' in polite, modern conversation.

Scanning the lists of conversations to get involved in, I came across this and it grabbed my interest.

Now, hopefully you'll excuse me, because I might be repeating something someone else said, or I might even be stepping on some toes, but I'm going to answer Tim's question without reference to the other responses and discussions which have been posted.

I'm doing this because, old as the question may be, it is indeed framed as a question which means, as far as I'm concerned, that when I came into this particular room, I was asked for my view on something. OK, Tim asked the question a long time ago, but I haven't been here before, so much like a star that exploded an age past, the light of it is only just reaching me, and frankly, it's pretty... I have to respond.

I should state from the outset that this subject interests me because I am a believer. I wouldn't want to deceive anyone about that fact.

But I'm also intelligent. That means that while, as a person of faith, my view is that the Bible is true and accurate, and that by extension anything which is implicitly true as a source, like the Bible, can be depended upon 'as is' - that is 'by faith', or as some would say 'blindly, I also like to have reasons to believe, reasons to know that my belief is correct. As an intelligent person, I believe therefore that anything which is an important and invariable truth will be clearly evidenced, will be reasonable, will in some way make sense, and will be compatible with other absolute, assertable truths. I don't, therefore, believe in 'truth relativism' where my truth, your truth, everyone else's truth might differ but is still true to each of us. Something is either true, or it isn't. I believe in absolutes.

So when I have a discussion like this, I can appreciate the apparently 'material' leaning of the person raising the issue. In this case I doubt that Tim was hoping for vague and convoluted and impossibly complex, deeply spiritual, 'only by faith' sorts of answers, but rather expected some kind of rational response. I suspect that this is why the question was framed in such a way as to address Constantine's involvement, rather than framing it so that it asks by what authority believers presume Jesus to be God incarnate.

I try wherever possible to answer the questions as rationally and logically as possible, without delving too much into the Biblical justifications and explanations. Like I said, if something is true it will do more than just make sense - it will be evidenced, it will, as it is studied, become apparent that absolutely nothing else fits as an explanation, that the alternatives are actually not merely improbable, but impossible. Supernaturalism is, after all, the field in which humanity shakes loose the tethers of probability, and dares to indulge possibility, sometimes to an end of truth, sometimes to the invention of fiction.

The question is obviously a multi-part question, so I'll do my best to address it as logically as a can.

First, was Constantine responsible for the deification of Jesus?

Simple answer. No. Not remotely.

The more complex answer elaborates on this point.

First, there is more verifiable, attestable, historically grounded evidence by which objective observers have attested to the deity (or supernaturality) of Jesus of Nazareth than there is, actually, for the events which tradition holds Constantine as experiencing. For example, a multiplicity of people in a common geographic region experienced changed lives having witnessed Jesus in some undeniable historically recorded events, and many of them testified to seeing a dead man raised back to life. By contrast, Constantine claimed that the 'vision' he saw out on the battlefield was witnessed by many. Not a single person has ever seen fit to record their presence at that event, and their witnessing of the sight, and indeed no circumstantial evidence exists that such an occurrance ever took place, nor indeed had any kind of profound impact on either Constantine himself, or anyone around him.

It should also be pointed out that Catholicism in general has managed to shroud much of its own claimed 'affirmation' of faith in such a neo-pagan mythology that given the nature of the conversion of 'pagan Romanism' to 'Christianisation' in 'Catholicism' and the painful insertion of pagan tradition, at odds with the Biblical doctrine pertaining to the expression and manifestation of faith in Christ and sound doctrine, to formulate the trappings of Catholic religiosity, it would be impossible to distinguish the elaborate, the fallacious and the outright deceptive from the truth.

For instance, various traditions hold that Constantine witnessed various visions. Different accounts name slightly different places, and different times. And more importantly is this: when Saul of Tarsus saw a revelation of the risen Jesus and believed, he changed his life, changed his name, changed the course of his works, and went from hunter to hunted. When Constantine saw his vision, it didn't make a hell of a lot of difference.

Constantine was born into a pagan culture, and died in a pagan culture, an adherent of paganism to the final day. Indeed, even after his new found tolerance of Christianity, not only were Christians persecuted (though not as a specific policy of the state) but Constantine continued in his role (as Caesar) of the highest pagan priest in the state religion.

The only way to understand what Constantine ACTUALLY did is to understand the history and the background. But the key to this is that Constantine was not, as is made out, a convert in the vein of a Paul. In fact, his contact with Christianity was far more passive.

He was born into a tradition of tolerance and diplomacy, and rose through the ranks in a fractious and divided Empire. He was witness to some of the worst persecutions of Christians in history, under Diocletian, second only to those of Nero - truly horrific attempts at genocide, which were endorsed by Diocletian's Senate as a universal policy, but which were never employed as universal edicts in the Western leg of the Roman Empire, where Constantine would be found when his accession to the Emperorship would be made known. Rome, as an Empire, was troubled. In the East, Diocletian was slaughtering and persecuting Christians. In the West Christians were left to prosper and as such were able to grow their influence somewhat, become a fixture in Western cultures. And Rome, divided by infighting, was sick, in general, of the whimsical persecutions and genocidal crusades of their emperors. Like all maturing civilisations the principles of tolerance and freedom became equated with enlightenment and a variety of groups, political, intellectual and religious, which were noted for their objection to the politics of the presiding emperor, found themselves in sympathy with the persecuted Christians.

The times they were a-changing, and in essence all that Constantine did was to suspend the mandatory imperial ruling promoting the active persecution and destruction of the Christian faith and its disciples, and promoted a new age of religious tolerance. In practice, it made little difference in Constantine's lifetime. The military was still allowed to persecute Christians (marched them naked out on to ice and then left them to freeze to death) and some elements of the culture never changed. Indeed, even after this explosion of 'tolerance', it was only a matter of mere centuries before the New Roman Empire (Catholicism) was back to burning Christians alive, just like Nero, for their pursuit of unadulterated Biblical faith, over the Imperialistic Edicts of the surrogate Caesar, the Pope. The model did not change, so much as transition from a pagan republic to an imperialistic theocracy in many ways.

And in a fractious empire, with enemies in every corner, both internal and external, why wage war on Christians when the wisest, most diplomatic thing would be to harness them, to include them - don't fight them, don't even join them... control them. Redefine them. Rule them.

Indeed, Constantine did not have a Pauline vision of Christ. He had a vision of Apollo and a promise of victory, and changed his faith allegiance in a patron god from Mars to the image of a Sun God, which was associated in the cultural tradition with Apollo, and artifacts from this time denote the common appearance of the shining (sun) halo around the head of the patron, now commonly found throughout Catholic iconography. The military was also noted for its observation of Sol/Apollo.

Constantine, it seems, came from a tradition of open-minded polytheism, and he didn't merely order a relaxation of laws against Christianity, but indeed widespread tolerance of ALL religions and acceptance of all Gods, religious universality, apparently compelled to tolerance itself, rather than Christ. Tradition holds that Constantine's vision was a logo in the sky, which, it is claimed, was a 'Christian' symbol. Unfortunately this is mythology, barely evidenced at all, and certainly not prolifically, not least problematic because there is no indication that Christians EVER used the symbol in question (overlaid P and X), but rather that pagans had been using it previously, much like the symbol of the cross in itself, derived from the ankh, symbol of eternal life in Ancient Egypt. Indeed, none of the symbology that Constantine adopted had anything to do with established Christianity, but rather paganism.

Under Constantine's reign certain pagan festivals took on a 'Christianised' leaning which have been claimed by Catholicism to be representative of universal Christian festivals. On the contrary, during this period Biblical Christians (Pauline, Petrine) note that they were abused and vilified for rejecting pagan festivals into their tradition, and much like the Council of Nicea, the 'authority' for Christendom was bestowed upon the bishops and leaders who sought position for themselves and authority over the people, and were prepared to compromise with the imperial system, in spite of the Bible being explicitly opposed to such entanglements and hierarchies of religious structure.

Latterly Catholicism invented all manner of unsupportable mythology about the 'Christianity' of Constantine, not least that his mother was made a saint and was attributed the discovery of the robe, cross, nails and rope involved in the crucifixion of Jesus, 'Christian relics' which are not mentioned as having been preserved in ANY credible Christian tradition for three hundred years since the time of Christ, not least the tradition around the eyewitnesses on the scene and founders of the Christian faith.

Constantine was, at best, what could be described as 'superstitious', and much like the tradition in Ancient Greece, which Constantine was heavily influenced by, there was an aspect of reverence 'to the unknown God' in order to cover all the bases of possibility. This was not personal conviction or conversion, in spite of this being a pivotal moment for Christians and indeed the modern world, this was merely an extension of what was already occurring organically in the general will of an increasingly tolerant society, which was harnessed and 'given ownership' by someone who wanted to claim total power and affirm their own supreme standing at the head of an Empire.

The end of Constantine's life, in fact, gives us a hint as to the poor quality of the prevailing, imperially compatible version of Christianity - that Constantine requested to be baptised before his death, associating baptism with salvation, and that he opted to wait until the last possible minute to ensure that the baptism atoned for as much of his sin as it could. This is quite clearly extra-Biblical, or rather anti-Biblical doctrine, typical for the 'Christianised Paganism' of the era which we find now embodied in Catholic tradition.

Constantine had called the Council of Nicea to order for the purpose of somewhat ratifying the position of the faith, or rather, to clarify it for his own understanding, since he was going to use it to political ends - having problematic control in the military, he needed to turn to a 'new priesthood' as his source of control in various places in the Empire, and Nicea is notable for the convening of 'compatible' Bishops, and the notable exclusion of Christian leaders who publicly opposed the compromises that these characters engaged in, and the very principle of state compatibility. Many Christian believers perceived the Council of Nicea to be the equivalent of the moment in which Wallace realised that the Bruce, and the Lords of Scotland had cast their lot in with the English Crown.

Since the evidence of Constantine's actual involvement in, or conversion to any form of Biblical Christianity is either non-existent, or anecdotal and circumstantial at best, it is impossible that Constantine could be responsible for the prevailing definition of Jesus of Nazareth in the Christian tradition.

Add to that the fact that Paul and Peter, amongst others, were already declaring the deity of Jesus, as were the travelling missionaries who had been eyewitnesses. Consider that historical evidence indicates that the Gospel of Jesus, the account we find in the Bible for the life, work, death, resurrection of Jesus and the traditions of doctrine in the New Testament had reached the British Isles before the end of the first century and was being believed, and that it was spread in Western and Northern Europe long before Constantine. It was, in fact, so established in places which were never fully 'Romanised' that it would have been impossible for Rome to completely define it, indeed Christian tradition in the earliest days found itself at odds with the Paganism of Roman patron deity worship.

Now, that's in respect of the deity of Jesus being attributed externally, by others, upon Jesus, by assertion.

That's without considering the fact that such an assertion was made, first, on the basis entirely of what Jesus said, what he did, what was eyewitnessed. His divinity, even if one discounts the virgin birth, was affirmed at his baptism physically. The disciples were not gullible idiots. It would have been problematic if they had been told by Jesus 'and a voice from heaven was heard and it said that I'm God's Son' when the crowds who were there could not verify such. The information must surely have come from external sources. And it was not unexpected, either. The prophetic tradition which was extensive, spanned a thousand years or more, and ceased around 400 years before the birth of Jesus, just in order to add a nice bit of time separation to ensure an absence of manipulation, also foretold of the divinity of the Messiah, with Peter affirming Jesus Messiahship, as Christ himself claimed to be divine or rather took personal responsibility in public for attributes which, in the Jewish tradition, could only be held by God (hence the charge of blasphemy that they brought against him). This attribution goes back as far as Abraham and beyond, Abraham who prophetically said to his son (a brilliant metaphoric picture too, in context) that 'God will provide Himself a sacrificial lamb.'

The divinity of Jesus was well established, and logically in evidence long before Constantine was even born, in fact, in 'real-time' with the events in question.

Now... the rest of the question...

The issue of the divinity of Christ is central to Christianity.

It is often said 'is it really that important? does it impact on his message.'

But what was 'his message?'

Not the paraphrase.

Not what we think it would have been.

Not the humanistic humanitarian version.

What was it ACTUALLY.

Surely it was nothing short of the assertion that in order to atone for sin, the sinless (the super-human) must die in the place of the sinful (the human) and that God Himself had provided this atonement, this sacrifice. Jesus manifested the miraculous, the attributes of the divine. He said good things. But it should also be noted that statistically he spoke on the subject of the law of God, the supernatural and eternal implications of that law, the penalty for breaking it, the human condition, and the need for a unique, once-for-all atoning saviour, the sinless dying for the sinful seven times more frequently than he spoke on the subject of 'love' or 'humanitarian goodness.' Contrary to popular opinion Jesus did not speak as a peacenik, as an activist, as a political figure, as a human rights advocate, but rather as an authority on spiritual truth, on Scripture, on what God had to say.

So in Himself, Jesus presents a challenge.

If he did not perform miracles, if he did not die and rise from the dead, if he did not make the audacious claims he made AND FULFIL THEM, would he have been so famous? Forget what Constantine might or might not have done three centuries later. Would tens of thousands of people in the Mediterranean middle east change their lives dynamically and profess to something so utterly preposterous that they would even die for, and would such a costly faith have spread like wildfire all for some guy who said some clever things, but didn't really do anything extraordinary.

Some argue that we can have a miraculous Jesus, but not a divine one. I fail to see how. If Jesus healed the sick, made the lame walk, made the blind see, restored hacked off appendages, and raised the dead, as was his reputation, and was 'just a man', how can he be the most unique man in human history, the only one for whom the work and miracles of their life are so profound, and so observed in human tradition within his own lifetime, that the lives of others would be changed by him. Surely we have no other reference for the 'divine', by which we can say that He is not absolutely the definition of the unexpected divine incarnate. We try to separate divinity from the inexplicable, only miraculous Jesus as if without the attribute of 'divinity' what Jesus said and did was fairly run of the mill and definitely strictly 'human.' The paradox, it seems, of the message is that he was both God, and man, and that both aspects of his nature are in evidence. That he died is proof of his humanity. That he suffered, is proof that he was a man. But that he transcended the laws of science, that he healed without performing surgery, that he raised the dead in front of eyewitnesses and in pretty verifiable circumstances ('he's been dead three days and he's smelling!') is proof of supernaturality, thus why not divinity? Is the manifestation of supernatural people to verifying crowds of people over prolonged periods so common place as to be anything other than divine? That he raised Himself from the dead is proof of divinity.

Further, if Jesus were not divine Himself, but were supremely supernatural and somehow favoured by God, why could he not just say that? Why would he lie? A lie denotes fraud, which denotes the propagation of a fiction. Why would someone supremely supernatural not just say 'I'm supremely supernatural and God does amazing things through me, but I'm not divine or specially chosen myself'? Jesus specifically answered questions which were intended to test his identity with profound and culturally problematic assertions of divinity that the casual reader doesn't observe. On several occasions Jesus was asked a question about his identity, and he responded with the same 'I Am' which, in Hebrew, God identified Himself with to Moses in Egypt before the presentation of God's demands to Pharoah. According to Biblical tradition, when the religious leaders asked Jesus if he thought he was divine, he responded with a word which caused them to tear their garments, pull their hair, lament and cry 'blasphemy', a charge of blasphemy which, under the scrutiny of a Roman governor noted for his adherence to the legalistic Roman system, was not cut and dried, but rather that according to the evidence the claims of Jesus could be substantiated reasonably. In fact, to such a degree, that Pilate himself appears to have taken them seriously, according to tradition, along with others from the ranks of the Romans, who had doubtless seen Jesus at work as a curiosity and were now seeing what they acknowledged were a phenomenal turn of events.

If Jesus were not who he said he was, who the heck was He, and why do we still not declare him to be a supreme authority and take him seriously?

If Jesus were 'just a man' like us, he would have joined the ranks of the countless claimants to the messiahship not just in the Jewish tradition, but in the world scene. The Jews killed many blasphemers (those claiming the attributes of God) and various 'Messianic' movements were noted during the period of the occupation, and indeed before and after. Yet none of them managed to come close to duplicating the appearance of authenticity that Jesus had, and his was the least organised, least political, least determined, least focused, least likely, least credible, least powerful, least connected crowd of followers, resisted and ultimately persecuted not only by their own people, but by the occupying force. Without the expressions of divinity, he would be an ignoble and forgotten upstart from Galilee who tried to stick feathers to himself with wax and, flying close to the sun, fail when the adhesive melted. One of many. Just another in a long line.

The dynamism, impact, longevity and fame of Jesus of Nazareth in the first two centuries from his incarnation, let alone to the present day, is testimony to the preposterous being materialised, the implausible proven possible, the ridiculous found to be true, to something unique defying all rational and natural conventions and surviving all opposition, against all odds, without the utility of a drawn sword of conquest, or a philosophical advantage, or a nationalistic devotion, or an intellectual popularity. This 'thing' carried on nothing more than eyewitness testimony and the the deferment of reference to living and known individuals who testified to what they had seen and experienced, to lives dynamically changed, observably, noticeably, dynamically.

History cannot provide an alternative reasonable explanation for this which is not either impossible, or in fact less plausible than the most obvious prima fascie, occam's razor-compatible claims of the Biblical doctrine pertaining to the identity of Christ.

If he wasn't who He said He was, and who He appeared to be, and who the eyewitnesses said He was, then who was He, and why is He so unique, and what does His uniqueness then mean?

More importantly, the manifestation of the supernatural in miracles, the expression of good sayings or philosophy by Jesus, and indeed his death by conspiracy and murder would all be utterly meaningless if there were no resurrection, no matter how hard to believe it is.

Jesus was a politically contentious figure, latterly, which convinced the Romans to grant the Jews their wishes, since it was clear that the Jewish authorities were posturing to capitulate to Rome and end the fractiousness if only the Romans allowed Jesus to be killed. The religious figures had authority over the people, and in their speech to Pilate they are clearly kissing Roman butt. Moreso, the Romans had to preside, as the legal authority, over every aspect of the proceedings. Even more compelling, the Romans were aware of Jesus' claims for themselves, and then were doubly warned by the Jewish religious authority that He had predicted his own resurrection after three days and that the Romans needed to guard his body until the three days were passed, lest the disciples take it and claim that he was risen, thereby fomenting what was feared would be a nationalistic insurgence led by a vanished dead person who was claimed to be Messiah. As a result, they kept control of the burial too, and placed a guard and the seal of the Emperor on the tomb.

In Roman tradition, the Emperor was like God on earth. He was considered near-divine. They were familiar with the concept of 'God-men.' The seal of the Emperor was inviolable. If you were part of the occupying force, and you were charged with keeping the Emperor's seal, and the stability of the province was dependent upon the maintenance of that seal for a period of three days until a safety margin had passed, you did not sleep, you did not blink, you did not derelict your duty, or you would be killed.

These soldiers then emerge with a story about how an earthquake took place, and supernatural beings turned up to move the stone on the tomb and break the seal. They scored no casualties, they gave no chase, they put no disciples on a wanted list. They did not even go straight to their military authority. They went to the Jewish religious leaders, because what had happened was, according to them, in the domain of the Jewish religion made manifest. The Jewish leaders then paid them off and persuaded them to tell their authorities that the disciples had launched a raid - that a bunch of fishermen and fat tax collectors and women had launched a Roman Guard beating raid and stolen a body, even more miraculously, neither the Roman soldiers had been killed or hurt, nor had any disciples been wounded or capture during the raid. Phenomenal.

Moreover, someone after the fact TOLD THE DISCIPLES that this had happened... They clearly had no idea at the time, since their responses were apparently organic and amazed following the revelation of resurrection. So, we can only conclude that the tradition picks up this nuance of the story came from insider information - either someone in the courts of the high priests and religious leaders who blew the whistle, or perhaps a Roman soldier himself who was there (or perhaps someone connected to a Roman who was involved) - the latter seems more likely, since the detail of what happened before the attempted conspiracy of misinformation is fairly detailed and probably more 'real' than anything that would be conveyed in a hurried and panic stricken haste as a last-ditch attempt to preserve their own lives. Maybe it WAS someone in the Jewish establishment, perhaps the Roman soldiers got paid off and then got executed for dereliction. Perhaps the Roman soldiers took the money and ran for their lives. Perhaps they ended up joining the Christians, convinced by what they saw.

The alternative explanations require more manipulations and imaginings and stretches of plausibility than even simply accepting the existence of the supernatural, and the supernaturality of Jesus.

Without Constantine, the Christian tradition would have survived anyway. It was already doing so to the frustration of Diocletian, and tolerance was already reigning in the Westernmost provinces, and beyond the reach of Rome. With Constantine, the Catholic church was formed, and a new dark age of torture and murder in the world began, with its trials for Christian believers and non Christians alike. But perhaps this was divinely ordained, because Catholicism became a machine by which Biblical Christianity was also purified, refined, and established in such a way that missionary work would become, in some cases, a national trait for nations like Britain and America, spreading the message of Jesus further and wider than it might have gone otherwise. And in turn the move from Dark Ages Catholicism into Renaissance, and then from the illicit philosophical and intellectual musings of Renaissance to the resistance of Reformation promoted not only the translation of the Bible into native tongues and the promotion of both reading and the printing press, but also ran in parallel with the advent of even rationalism and atheism - freedom of thought and speech, by which the power of established religion was shaken, and the Christian message was restored to its roots of personal testimony, conviction, and personal reasoning and decision making, rather than imposed nominal cultural religiosity by predominance. And from it, in accordance with it, we have marvellous traditions of freedom and democracy arising from Christian conviction.

Without the divinity of Jesus, established clearly in his supernaturality and particularly his resurrection, not to mention the fulfilment of scores of prophecies which he embodied, and indeed those that he uttered himself, Christianity would not have had legs at all. There would be no moral conversion, no dynamic testimony of a risen Saviour, no manifestation of the power of God in individual lives as a result, and no undeniable, burning conviction that was worth dying horribly for in order to continue to attest to an irrefutable, indestructible truth.

These cannot be coincidences. These have to be connected to a core, central, powerful truth, else they are inexplicable and ridiculous - more ridiculous than merely believing.

Can this all be a manipulation? A conspiracy? For what purpose? Qui Bene? Who benefits? The principals, the eleven eyewitnesses who lifted the torches and ran with them, who gave their testimonies before crowds, and persuaded many, did not benefit. They did not become famous and popular, they became notorious and hunted. They did not become rich, they suffered hardships. They did not pass legacies on to children, or establish empires for their descendants. And each and every one of them died for their profession, their faith - from Jesus' brothers, who took a lesser role than others, to Paul and John - either from execution, or in a state of imprisonment and exile. None of the cultic imperialistic traditions held by catholicism, of relics, or of secret marriages, or of Jesuit heirs, or of arcane mysteries are in evidence in the credible early church history. They appear to have been much like us - ordinary and testifying not to academia or some learned script, but to what had happened to them and what they had been witness to.

What other explanation is there, that this is totally organic, totally unique, and entirely as it appears at first glance to be.

And just as there seems to be an innate desire in many to deny it and reject it for its implications, so there is also a worrying suspicion that it might be absolutely right - and in others there is a comforting realisation of a long-suspected reality.

If I could impart how fervently I know it to be true it would sound arrogant and presumptuous. If I could explain the supernatural way in which believing it was only the first step in an inexplicable revelation in which it makes nothing but absolute perfect sense, and more now than at the beginning, it would sound ludicrous. So my argument is not based on how convinced I am, but rather on how the evidence indicates affirmative support, how the reasoning of what cannot be denied, and what cannot be explained in any other way convincingly leads to the most probable conclusion in defiance of perceptions of plausibility, and rationality.

So you have the faith, and you have the attempt to reason.

That would be my answer to Tim's question, for whatever it's worth.

Thanks for taking the time to read it.

And like I said, I DID NOT read ANY other responses, so I could be rehashing what's already been said just as much as I could be adding a fresh perspective. Equally, the perspective is, at the very least, mine. If others hold it and express it here, that's coincidence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 24 Apr 2009
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:07 pm    Post subject: Looking through a glass partly Reply with quote

Ok. I read the above over the past week. Hey, I only read 3 books a week, so shoot me. Anyway, it finally hit me. Then I tested.
Print out the above reply in 14 point courier, after adding the last letter of each word to the first letter of each 5th sentence fourth word, omitting the preceding consonant.

Then hold it up to a mirror.

John Lennon is alive. It's all there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 22 Sep 2007
Posts: 3375
Location: GERMAN PAMPA!!!

PostPosted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 3:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Got much spare time, huh? Laughing

Elvis isn't dead either!!!! Laughing
He's 74 years old by now which is probably why ppl don't recognize him on the street any more!!!

PS: Print out 2000 copys of the above reply in size 26 FELIX TITLING or GOUDY STOUT. Use some duct tape (ducktape lol) to stick them all together in a row. By the time you are finished you've got the worlds longest roll of toilet paper.
Congratulations on your new Guinness World Record!!!!!! Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 08 Sep 2009
Posts: 3
Location: NC

PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:48 pm    Post subject: Re: Jesus... the Man. Reply with quote

TimAllen wrote:
Was the Emperor Constantine responsible for the deification of Jesus? Jesus was both the Prophet and the Messenger, but what condition would the Christian world be in if it was true that Jesus was also a man just as us? Would that have minimized the impact of his words?

His Deity was made public when a group of onlookers watched as John the Baptist had baptised Jesus. And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased" Constatine was not the one speaking as he was born over 200 years later. The true Christians know Him because he speaks to their hearts, when they shutup and listen. He woke me up from my sleep and told me to interview a guy who was in prison for 20 years, http://www.theytold.us/prison/80_mins_video.html who can tell you in his own words who Jesus is and how He set him free..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Joined: 13 Oct 2009
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 6:10 pm    Post subject: Jesus the Man Reply with quote


Last edited by twin26007 on Thu Jan 19, 2012 1:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Oct 2009
Posts: 3
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is the time of year that Jesus' Birth is celebrated.
Jesus the Man, the Messenger, the Spirit, God's Son, Your Heart; He's All.
His Birth; His becoming a Man; His Messages; His Spirit and being God's Son; He should be in your heart and celebrated the whole year through.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TimAllen.com Forum Index -> The Really Big Questions All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 8 of 9

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.