what if Christ left a personal sign for mankind?

I wrote:

what if Christ left a personal sign for mankind?
We have quotes, in ancient Greek, from people who lived after the events,
but no direct words.

There is no handwriting, or drawing or anything left from Jesus. His disciples,
knowing what they knew, and witnessing what they saw, did not think to preserve something for posterity.

Christ, being God etc, could easily have arranged to have a sign left somewhere, and which could be used to ward of the evil one.

If such a sign was found, what would be the reaction of believers?

*****************

mtpspur posted:

I'm slightly confused here. I would think the quotations of the Lord Christ as recorded in the texts of the Bible are a sign from Him. I would think that testimony would stand. Personally I would be very suspicious of any relic purported to be of Him, for example the Grail. We all know Indiana Jones found THAT!! Hope this helps or I've helped kill another thread but I do believe the scriptures are enough to study and feed on to last many a lifetime.

********************

Pen replied:

I agree on this, mon ami, but I think the movie did get one point right. Jesus was a simple man. His work experience was a carpenter. There would be no "Holy Grail" as in some large Gold or Silver chalice if it were the cup from the Last Supper.

Wooden or earthenware, and very anceint, not bright and new looking. But
seriously, ever noted the wording of these two scriptures:

Matt.12
[39] But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation
seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the
prophet Jonas:

Matt.16
[4] A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign

be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

Perhaps we are not meant to look for signs. Most of us, if we would be truly honest, find it difficult enough to simply try to "love thy neighbor as thyself." We grow angry without cause, bicker and fight, become selfish, hold grudges, and are apt to be quick with our mouth. And please note I said "we" which includes me.

***********************************

mtpspur is slightly confused. I too get confused when trying to follow the bible texts.

Pen tells us that Matthew has the answer to anyone who seeks to find evidence or proof of what Scripture would have us believe.

I get confused with the notion that a god provides us all with a brain to think with, and somehow we are not supposed to question that which seems to make no sense at all.

Pen quotes Matthew 12 and 16 but what about the passage which generated those two lines?

Matt 12:38
Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we
would see a sign from thee.

Here, we have the scribes and Pharisees (both of whom are literate, unlike the rest of the plebs) and they ask for a sign of evidence. But just previously to that passage

(Matt 12:22 ) Jesus cures someone who is both blind and dumb.

How one cannot see the connection makes me almost speechless: Scribes wrote, and Pharisees made speeches.

Anyway, the plebs were amazed (Matt 12:23).

But not the Pharisees, those with learning, for upon hearing of this remarkable feat, they feel justified in asking Jesus about it.

Matt 12:24
But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

So, not being given any evidence, the Pharisees resort to accusations that Jesus is a wicked man that practices the black arts.

Pen, like the Pharisees, seems to believe that I must be wicked also, because I dare to question the basis of Christianity.

I maybe wrong, but I sense that to be his drift. But I am in no way offended by his reply, because I have a brain, and can use it to formulate a repy.

As to the sign of Jonas (Jonah), I cannot find one in the Bible, all I can find is a story about Jonah, who is not a prophet, by the way, it's Amittai, his dad who is the prophet, so Matthew is wrong there surely?

What is the sign of Jonah? Even allowing that a man can be swallowed by a fish, and be taken to the bottom of the sea in the fishes belly etc, the story itself seems very confusing.

Unless the sign of Jonah means that gifts from God contain worms and rot
overnight, I fail to see the sign.

Regards

Please do not personalise your comments

and

please be prepared that there will be those who disagree with your ideas and question them.

The sign was that Jesus would rise from the dead within three days, that was as long as He would be dead, as Jonah was thought to be.

I myself have questioned everything on occasion, my faith still holds. It isn't evil to question, it's what you will you do with the answer if it isn't the one you want.

My apologies to anyone offended by any remark made by me. I seldom visit this area, mainly because I tend to believe a bit differently, and one thing I don't believe in, is forcing others to see it my way.

God Bless and probably good-bye from this area. Anyone who wishes can PM me.

Pen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redzeppelin

where non-believers insist upon some sort of "evidence" in order to believe in God;

---

I can appreciate your frustration, but try to take the perspective this isn't really a religious forum, but a literature discussion forum, and nobody has forced you into debate. Likewise, we are free to discuss such literature, if not here, then somewhere else. The questions we ask here about who wrote scriptures, and why they wrote them makes sense in this context. Perhaps such discussion would not make sense on a religious forum, I can't say.

Regarding belief, the concern is that it is possible for one to misplace his belief, mistaking the words of writers who have a political or theological agenda, with the actual words, intent or will of the prophet or savior (for which we seem to be without primary artifact). This is an eternal question, perhaps not answerable, but one some of us find worthy of questioning. Others may not wish to challenge the authenticity of scripture. Fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by earthboar

I can appreciate your frustration, but try to take the perspective this isn't really a religious forum, but a literature discussion forum, and nobody has forced you into debate. Likewise, we are free to discuss such literature, if not here, then somewhere else. The questions we ask here about who wrote scriptures, and why they wrote them makes sense in this context. Perhaps such discussion would not make sense on a religious forum, I can't say.

Regarding belief, the concern is that it is possible for one to misplace his belief, mistaking the words of writers who have a political or theological agenda, with the actual words, intent or will of the prophet or savior (for which we seem to be without primary artifact). This is an eternal question, perhaps not answerable, but one some of us find worthy of questioning. Others may not wish to challenge the authenticity of scripture. Fine.

---

OK - I'm at a loss as to why this comment of mine is provoking such responses; it was simply a tangential remark about the inability of "proof" to actually do what many individuals believe it is capable of doing. That was all I was trying to say. There is no attack on anybody, no frustration, no condemnation, no nothing. Simply an observation that connects to the thematic idea in this thread about physical "evidence" that may/not corroborate a claim. My apologies if I've been misunderstood to be saying something I'm not.

I must note that I do not believe in the bible tales because it is hard to believe in the story within, after all I could easily believe in The Odissey, it is a better written book anyways. But is a considerable insensibility to not understand that if one does not believe in Jesus's historical reality as described in the Bible, what they do not believe is in the Bible. They are not two separate beings, where the register of one is not related to the register of the other. The Bible is the main and only source for Jesus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCamilo

I must note that I do not believe in the bible tales because it is hard to believe in the story within, after all I could easily believe in The Odissey, it is a better written book anyways. But is a considerable insensibility to not understand that if one does not believe in Jesus's historical reality as described in the Bible, what they do not believe is in the Bible. They are not two separate beings, where the register of one is not related to the register of the other. The Bible is the main and only source for Jesus.

---

The Odyssey (masterpiece that it is) was written to entertain; the Bible was written to instruct; the former was created by a man; the latter was inspired by God. Those differences make them incomparable. (Besides, the universe of Homer's is terrifying in terms of its crippling of free will.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by earthboar

... Jesus didn't say he was God..."

---

I used to believe this also,
but then I found out by studying the meanings of some passages,
that in fact Jesus DID say He was God,
and that's why the religious leaders of His day were so offended by Him,
why they attempted to stone Him to death,
and why they eventually crucified Him.

John 5:18 ESV
(18) This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

John 8:56-59 ESV
(56) Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad."
(57) So the Jews said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?"
(58) Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."
(59) So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.

When Jesus said "I am" He was claiming to be Ever-Existent.
This is why they immediately intended to stone Him to death for blasphemy.

Adam Clarke's translation of Calmet’s note on this [John 8:58] passage: - “I am from all eternity. I have existed before all ages. You consider in me only the person who speaks to you, and who has appeared to you within a particular time. But besides this human nature, which ye think ye know, there is in me a Divine and eternal nature. Both, united, subsist together in my person. Abraham knew how to distinguish them. He adored me as his God; and desired me as his Savior. He has seen me in my eternity, and he predicted my coming into the world.”

John 10:30-33 ESV
(30) I and the Father are one."
(31) The Jews picked up stones again to stone him.
(32) Jesus answered them, "I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?"
(33) The Jews answered him, "It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God."

Luke 22:66-71 ESV
(66) When day came, the assembly of the elders of the people gathered together, both chief priests and scribes. And they led him away to their council, and they said,
(67) "If you are the Christ, tell us." But he said to them, "If I tell you, you will not believe,
(68) and if I ask you, you will not answer.
(69) But from now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God."
(70) So they all said, "Are you the Son of God, then?" And he said to them, "You say that I am."
(71) Then they said, "What further testimony do we need? We have heard it ourselves from his own lips."

'You say that I am' was the equivalent of saying "yes".

John 14:8-11 ESV
(8) Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us."
(9) Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
(10) Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works.
(11) Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.



I use the English Standard Version which is based on UBS4-
the most up-to-date critical texts available.
All the bolds are mine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sciencefan

In my opinion, Jesus Christ DID leave a sign.
It is the Shroud of Turin.

http://www.shroudstory.com/
http://www.factsplusfacts.com/shroud...negativity.htm
http://www.factsplusfacts.com/
http://www.shroudofturin.com/
http://www.shroud.com/menu.htm


Strange that you say the disciples of Jesus did not leave anything for posterity.
The entire New Testament of the Bible is written by disciples who were eye-witnesses of the Resurrected Christ.

---

eye witnesses? I alway thought the names given as Mat Mark Luke and Jon etc were added to texts which bear no names, and those texts being some time after that which was said to have occoured?

You say Turin, I say towl. What about that bloody image of a face on a towl which St Veronica is said to have captured?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mike thomas

eye witnesses? I alway thought the names given as Mat Mark Luke and Jon etc were added to texts which bear no names, and those texts being some time after that which was said to have occoured?

You say Turin, I say towl. What about that bloody image of a face on a towl which St Veronica is said to have captured?

---

Forgive me, I mistook your intent for posting here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sciencefan

I used to believe this also,
but then I found out by studying the meanings of some passages,
that in fact Jesus DID say He was God,
and that's why the religious leaders of His day were so offended by Him,
why they attempted to stone Him to death,
and why they eventually crucified Him.

John 5:18 ESV
(18) This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

John 8:56-59 ESV
(56) Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad."
(57) So the Jews said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?"
(58) Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."
(59) So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.

When Jesus said "I am" He was claiming to be Ever-Existent.
This is why they immediately intended to stone Him to death for blasphemy.

Adam Clarke's translation of Calmet’s note on this [John 8:58] passage: - “I am from all eternity. I have existed before all ages. You consider in me only the person who speaks to you, and who has appeared to you within a particular time. But besides this human nature, which ye think ye know, there is in me a Divine and eternal nature. Both, united, subsist together in my person. Abraham knew how to distinguish them. He adored me as his God; and desired me as his Savior. He has seen me in my eternity, and he predicted my coming into the world.”

John 10:30-33 ESV
(30) I and the Father are one."
(31) The Jews picked up stones again to stone him.
(32) Jesus answered them, "I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?"
(33) The Jews answered him, "It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God."

Luke 22:66-71 ESV
(66) When day came, the assembly of the elders of the people gathered together, both chief priests and scribes. And they led him away to their council, and they said,
(67) "If you are the Christ, tell us." But he said to them, "If I tell you, you will not believe,
(68) and if I ask you, you will not answer.
(69) But from now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God."
(70) So they all said, "Are you the Son of God, then?" And he said to them, "You say that I am."
(71) Then they said, "What further testimony do we need? We have heard it ourselves from his own lips."

'You say that I am' was the equivalent of saying "yes".

John 14:8-11 ESV
(8) Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us."
(9) Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
(10) Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works.
(11) Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.



I use the English Standard Version which is based on UBS4-
the most up-to-date critical texts available.
All the bolds are mine.

---

whos to say that these werent mere alterations done to the original gospels by the hierarchy of the church back in the 3rd or 4th century to make the followers of christ believe that he was the son of god. This is quite possible if you think of the time frame. A few hundred years later christianity was deminishing because humanity, in most of the known world at the time, believed the world was going to end in the year 1000ad. Year 1000ad comes and goes, world still exists, Irish monks go to mainland europe repreaching the word of god from the gospals with other religious groups, christianity flourishes again. nobody alive can say what the original gospels say because they didnt exist when the original gospels were written.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niamh

whos to say that these werent mere alterations done to the original gospels by the hierarchy of the church back in the 3rd or 4th century to make the followers of christ believe that he was the son of god. This is quite possible if you think of the time frame. A few hundred years later christianity was deminishing because humanity, in most of the known world at the time, believed the world was going to end in the year 1000ad. Year 1000ad comes and goes, world still exists, Irish monks go to mainland europe repreaching the word of god from the gospals with other religious groups, christianity flourishes again. nobody alive can say what the original gospels say because they didnt exist when the original gospels were written.

---

Those who have been more skeptical than I, and have studied it in more depth than I, have come away from their studies convinced that the Bible is true, and that Jesus is God.

Two such examples are Josh McDowwell and Lee Strobel.
They have written books about it
which are probably available at your library.

Okay, cheers.
It was a thought that just popped into my head at any rate. I always think of history and historically logical reasons for things. But who knows could be true! But thats a whole can of worms.:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mtpspur

I'm slightly confused here. I would think the quotations of the Lord Christ as recorded in the texts of the Bible are a sign from Him. I would think that testimony would stand. Personally I would be very suspicious of any relic purported to be of Him, for example the Grail. We all know Indiana Jones found THAT!!;) Hope this helps or I've helped kill another thread but I do believe the scriptures are enough to study and feed on to last many a lifetime.

---

you say relic and think grail, but what if the sign were written in Scripture: ink on paper; would you be any less suspicious?

regards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sciencefan

(Proverbs 9:7 ESV) Whoever corrects a scoffer gets himself abuse, and he who reproves a wicked man incurs injury.

Forgive me, I mistook your intent for posting here.

---

think nothing of it.
I assume your words were directed at me.

regards