The Original Christians were vegetarian/vegan

[centrehice]

You guys need a holiday together to see if it will work.

[Wickabee]

I somewhat disagree, someone does not need to know the past to understand the teachings of the present. the old covenant is not even close to the new. no chosen people, and the laws are are much different as well.

Others issues include authorship and how may translations have occurred in the OT, to know how altered it really is. Another issue is translation of Hebrew into English, and for the most part it is pretty poor. I have taken some time with Exodus, and the Exodus us English speaking people know and the story of Exodus in Hebrew are quite different.

To me there are only two real requirements for someone to be a follower of Jesus, when these two are met, the rest fall in place.

now on the other hand I do agree with you, seeing how Jesus fulfilled the prophecies of the OT shows how He was brought about. But there were others before Him, the big difference is the two things I think are the true foundation of believing Jesus was the true one and not the others.

you can understand His teachings, only via His teachings, this is apparent when we see what Paul and Peter have to say compared to what Jesus taught. I have been digging around in the Gospel of Thomas lately, some interesting stuff in there. I am not 100% sure if it is real, but so far I have found little to prove it is not. but it is a short and good read, and makes a lot of sense to me thus far, but i am undecided on it right now.

He repeatedly referenced the Ten Commandments and old laws. There may be major differences, but that doesn't mean the basis isn't there.

[shrewsbury]

I agree, He also mentions Noah and others. For me, reading or memorizing the works is not the same as understanding them, and to think you can understand them via reading or memorization does not always work. The laws of how to live are second to understanding His teachings, for me. He is the way to understanding God, which holds the keys to everything, on this earth and beyond. not that I seek the knowledge of God rather I am just trying to figure out what the heck is going on. Rather than being a blind follower (like many religious people) I tend to seek out more. This could be right or wrong, but it took me many, many years to come to the conclusion that Jesus was the messiah, I needed more than people telling me it was the truth or a book stating it was the truth, it needed to make sense to me, historically and spiritually.
trying to understand views on things like diet, sexuality, prayer, alms, and relationships is not so cut and dry. we both know Jesus never wrote anything (which makes sense to me) and rarely laid laws out that are easy to understand or relate to our way of life. He was more of a pointer of the way ,than a machine full of answers, He was an example for us, but in a time that was much different than ours.
I guess I will reveal how crazy I really am, but lately I find myself researching, studying and thinking on things such as, after His resurrection why did his followers not recognize Him? Why is the number 40 so important (does it really have to do with Venus)? The validity of the works of Thomas and why was Thomas so downplayed by the church when he played some important roles in the NT? And the real story of the Exodus,which I have been writing on for months now.

I have found through my life that the spaces in between, that seem unimportant or void, often reveal the truth of what is before and after it. Though the end result is what we are looking for, the journey to get there is the most important thing. Kind of like the theory of human evolution if you take just the facts and listen to the theory, it seems right on, but when you start poking around and looking at the time in between finds, the amount of finds, and the specific explanations, things start to fall apart, and even science does not agree. this is why I often point out the savanah and aquatic hypothesis.

there's my crazy religious rant for the day

[Wickabee]

Jesus told us which commandments were most important to follow. He came on behalf of the God of Abraham. Understanding the Israelite laws isn't rocket science, but you need not be an expert and it has nothing to do with memorizing. The OT, like the words of Jesus in the Gospels, simply be understood. Most of it is stories of what happened that, true or not, are continually proven to be historically accurate in details. Not much understanding. Knowing the history that Jesus came from and referenced is important to understanding his words.

[shrewsbury]

Being He was the messenger of God, understanding where He came from is not in the OT. The OT deals with man and the laws of the first covenant of man and God. Does the OT tell us where God came from or what God is? I am not so interested in Jesus the man as I am interested in God and Jesus' understanding of God.

By limiting your search to a book that was put together by man at the end of the third century seems to be limiting to me and at no time does Jesus say anying in the NT is legit, for obviously He never mentions it. I would think if He thought the NT was going to play such an important role if Christianity, He may have addressed this. Having no writings from Jesus Himself makes us wade through the ideas and interpretations of men, who is right, why are there conflicting stories and ideas?
this is why it is not so simple, to simply believe does not require logic, to seek to understand does. the absent of knowledge leads to the illogical, the seeking of understanding may lead to knowing more than we do, as long as we can keep our expectations and ego out of it.

[Wickabee]

Being He was the messenger of God, understanding where He came from is not in the OT. The OT deals with man and the laws of the first covenant of man and God. Does the OT tell us where God came from or what God is? I am not so interested in Jesus the man as I am interested in God and Jesus' understanding of God.

By limiting your search to a book that was put together by man at the end of the third century seems to be limiting to me and at no time does Jesus say anying in the NT is legit, for obviously He never mentions it. I would think if He thought the NT was going to play such an important role if Christianity, He may have addressed this. Having no writings from Jesus Himself makes us wade through the ideas and interpretations of men, who is right, why are there conflicting stories and ideas?
this is why it is not so simple, to simply believe does not require logic, to seek to understand does. the absent of knowledge leads to the illogical, the seeking of understanding may lead to knowing more than we do, as long as we can keep our expectations and ego out of it.

But the law he gives comes from the same place as the OT laws. He did call those God's laws and he himself followed said laws. To me that says as much about Jesus the Son of God as it does about Jesus the man.

I suppose this is where we split, create our own churches and wage war for hundreds and hundreds of years.

[shrewsbury]

sounds to complicated, how about we can discuss things and realize we are different and both of us may be wrong?

but I do partially agree and can fully understand what you are saying, which, I guess, is a start?

[Wickabee]

I don't know. History tells us we should probably fight.

[shrewsbury]

there you go wanting to rely on history again!!!!

But ok, my God is better than yours!!!

wait......................



I think they might be one and the same??!!!!!

[Wickabee]

there you go wanting to rely on history again!!!!

But ok, my God is better than yours!!!

wait......................



I think they might be one and the same??!!!!!

We've been over this. They are thre separate entit...oh, you meant...ok...yeah, but...there are slight differences in how we view him.

SLIGHT DIFFERENCES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!