seedplanter,

What I am saying is aside from being a god or not, any person that was motivating others to repeal against the Roman Empire would no doubt cause issues, and it's in the romans best interest to nip in the butt sooner rather than later, this is why jesus was hardly the only person crucified or killed for motivating others to uprise against the empire.

"I am not saying he as an individual was a threat, but his new message, new way of thinking was radical and inspired new followers which in turn is a direct threat to the control the Roman Empire had. The last thing you want, as a leader of a a huge empire, is a some wild eyes rebel speaking out and getting people rilled and fired up at their unjust treatment and this is partially what jesus inspired."


Agent, do you have any historical evidence here or is this just the way you think the events may have transpired since they did in fact execute him and since he was after all known as the Messiah?

Pilate did confront Jesus about his claims of royalty in which he responded that his kingdom was not of this world. I don't believe that there really was any feeling of being threatened on the part of the Romans. His teachings were really not that revolutionary prior to his death and resurrection and at that it was in the aspect of his assumed authority, his unabashed revising of the Sanhedrin’s interpretations of the Torah, his miracles (which were attested to in his opposition’s writings – The Babylonian Talmud) and most importantly his direct claims of deity, which would have seemed quite ambiguous to the Romans (i.e. riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, claiming the title I AM THAT I AM, etc.). It wasn’t really until nutty Nero’s reign that Christianity as a religion and as representing certain ideas that were somehow suspicious to Nero that they became an apparent threat resulting in severe persecution. However, up until his resurrection I just don’t see Jesus as threat at all to the Roman Rulers. According to the Bible the concern was to satisfy the Jewish Sanhedrin who passed him on to Pilate as an instigator. Pilate didn’t seem to find any fault in him and apparently did not even want to handle the trial, until after enormous pressure was put on him. This would also explain why Roman Catholics were anti-Semitic for many years, some how blaming Christ’s death on them, when in reality the Bible lays the blame upon us all in the sense that it was all of our sins that he bore.

agentx when do you finally go and get your copy of "a case for a creator" written by Lee Strobel. This book is written for you. Go to amazon or to your trusted dealer and see what well knwon scientists say about evolution.
Man this theory has no chance to be taken seriously.

Now GO and get it.

agentorange

I don't care what any one has to say about the film. I would have to view it myself and draw my own conclusions. I might view it as long as I don't have to pay to see it. I don't know. It might serve my future purposes if I did see the film. I don't know yet what I will do.

star2,

Fox news aside, would you be more impressed if I gave the entire list of negative reviews by all critiques for 'Expelled' thus far? I am sure only a short hours of Google searching will return such results, I know LA Times and others were critical of it. I am not saying Fox news is the end all be all of reporting (it's not even close) but rather that even they, Fox News, a conservative leaning news channel, with a conservative leaning audience aer even harsh on such a film that one would think would appeal to their viewers.

agentorange

Re:and not even Fox News folks like 'expelled', ouch. -

Just because Roger Friedman of Fox News disliked the film doesn't mean anything. fox News hires all kinds of people of different beliefs. They hire liberals, conservatives, democrats, republicians, and independents. They hire Catholics, Protestants, other religious persuations, and no belief. They hire those who hold to evolution and those who don't. Roger Friedman speaks for himself not Fox News. Friedman could very well be of your persuation (evolutionist), and would view the film based on that bias. Maybe not. Neither one of us knows. I personally won't see the film because I disagree with ID. As you know quite well I am a YEC. I am not interested in any other view.

Get this, it turns out the folks that produced Expelled committed a violation of copy right infringement! Way to go - http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/04/will-the-public.html#comments-open

First Stein offers $$ for people (particularly schools to go see his film), then they were caught in expelling (how ironic) PZ Myers (a person who was interviewed in the film mind you) from open online registration iinvitation pre-screening at the Mall of America and now they're caught in illegally using copy righted material, ouch.

and not even Fox News folks like 'expelled', ouch. - http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/04/flunked-not-exp-1.html

He preached in his words, under his own authority.
This is the radical thing about it. This is what those men called blasphemy, this is what destroid theier authority based on tradition.

The Jewish rules allways related to some other rulers, just like in Catholic church today.
Putting earthly tradition above God himself.
Building up rules that people can not obey, instead of preaching freedom thrugh the Spirit.

His Cross made the difference, no rules needed to obey to achieve a cleared up relationship with God himself. Just to love God and believe in Him and throu him being filled up with the Holy Spirit to live a life according to the will of God.

Too "simple" to believe...even today.

Jesus did not revolute against the Roman Empire.
He said clearly to give Caesar what belongs to him. He called out to obey the leaders of the Land and to pray for them. This is even what his judge statet when he was to be centenced: this man is not guilty.

All he did was teaching against the jewish Rulers who did everything but obeying God and the Bible. They came up with theier own teachings but obeying theier own rules.
They cared about themselves, not about God.
If they did, they would have clearly seen that the predictions of the old testament are fullfilled by Jesus Christ and this is whats going on today in Jewish Religion.
They do not see the truth right before theier eyes.

So the threat of his teachings was for them and for the devil, not for any political system.

He was teachning love above all. He explanied that love is the essence of the 10 commandments. And he was teaching him being the son of God to free from rules and to life a new life filled up with the Holy Spirit.

star2, I agree. jesus as a radical teacher (compared with the jews) was not only a threat to the jewish control structure, but also to the control of the current Roman Empire. I am not saying he as an individual was a threat, but his new message, new way of thinking was radical and inspired new followers which in turn is a direct threat to the control the Roman Empire had. The last thing you want, as a leader of a a huge empire, is a some wild eyes rebel speaking out and getting people rilled and fired up at their unjust treatment and this is partially what jesus inspired. star, when you consider if and why they wanted to put jesus to death, at least consider the extra biblical sources alongside luke and NT.

prodriver,

Got the sound, but never the visual. RC Sproul is always good. A very logical, fact based person who has a knack for presenting reasoned approaches.

It´s an mp3 file and it takes a while to load.
So be patient, the link works.

It´s a "teaching lesson" with Dr. R.C. Sproul and worth waiting.

prodriver

I can't get anything to come up with the site you listed. Could you give me the name and/or date of the item so I can find it please.

Here are a lot of really clever people, dealing with a very tricky topic and I don´t try to ridicule you, I mean what I say.
So I appeal to your heads and minds and offer you something to listen to about truth and what truth has to do with Christianity and Evolution and Life itself:

http://media.ligonier.org/audio/rym20070410.mp3

God bless you

DARWINISM AND ATHEISM are both UNSCIENTIFIC & MYTHICAL

http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com

ifeelfine72

What makes you think that some parts of the Bible are nothing more than an allegory? Jesus didn't view it as such. Neither did Paul and Peter.

Looking at most of Genesis as an allegory didn't happen until the Greek thoughts and philosophies of Plato and Aristotle were applied to interpreting the Holy Scriptures by Origen and Augustine and later the early Catholic Church Fathers.

ifeelfine72

Where in the Bible does God say that He approves of two men having sex with one another? or two women having sex with one another?

I can only find scripture that says that God is against it. He calls it sin and an abomination. See Lev 18:22 and Lev 20:13

Seedplanter - I never said that WIlliam Wilburforce was a progressive liberal. I said that progressive Christians were mostly the ones that were for abolition. Fundamental, conservative Christians for the most part were in favor of slavery. Don't put words in my mouth.

As for your question: Why does the question of the immorality of homosexuality hinge upon the morality of other Christians? I don't understand what you mean, please elaborate.

As for the rest of your comments, you would do well to look at your own comments with an impartial eye.

Homosexuality and evolution are two "hot button" topics. And there are a lot of "Christians" here that claim you have to be against both to be a Christian and that just isn't the case. I claim Christ just like most of the folks that post here. If your concern is with the tenor of my comments, just read the posts of many folks that agree with you, they are every bit as confrontational - I've never called AgentOrange, AgentOrnery. He is probably the most temperate poster on this site and he says he's an atheist.

Star, this is not to argue against your well made points and Scriptural references, but there is a bit more involved here than just envy, although that played a part obviously. What I am asking Agent is why Pilate conferred with the Sanhedrin to sentence him to execution by way of the cross. While I do think that the Bible is the most credible source as to the historical account, setting personal beliefs aside I am not necessarily limiting him to that text. There are certain historical facts that we can ascertain that were relevant to the case. The Scriptures certainly cannot be thrown out even from a secular point of view, considering the multiple attestations in extra-Biblical sources that verify certain events, as well as internal evidence that speak to its historical validity and other extenuating circumstances. For what it is worth, Agent is welcome to even use his imagination if he thinks it will help identify certain historical events, such as why the Romans thought Jesus was a threat or that he was at least deemed worthy of capital punishment.

agentorange

Jesus was not a threat to the Roman Empire. He was a threat to the religious establishment of His people.

Neither Herod nor Pilate wanted to put Jesus to death because they found no fault in Him (Luke 23:4,15,22). Herod even was happy to see Jesus because he heard a lot about Him and was hoping that He would do some miracle (Luke 23:8) It was the elders of the people, the chief priests, and the scribes that wanted Him crucified (Luke 22:66). Why? They claimed that it was because Jesus said that He was the Son of God (Luke 22:70-71). But that wasn't the real reason. The real reason was because they were envious of Him (Matt 27:18).

Jesus is their judge. They each will give an account to God for their actions just like you, me and everyone else.