Mopac

I would not be surprised if RM was like 14 years old or something.

There was a time, long long ago when you were considered an idiot if you were anything but anonymous on the internet.

Aaaaaaaaaaaand now we have facebook. The single greatest invention in intelligence gathering there ever was.

Schmucks.

You established this, but you thinling something doesn't make it true.

As it isn't what the church teaches, and in fact goes against what the church teaches, it is automatically disqualified from being sound teaching to say Jesus disobeyed the Mosaic law. 

It is like you are saying that Jesus was a bad Jew.

I'm not saying it is intentional, so that affords you some grace, eh?

But it is a bad teaching to say Jesus broke the mosaic law.

It is understood that a lot of the things that Jesus said likely did not completely register until after Jesus was crucified, even up until pentecost.

I don't think you realize that accusing Jesus of breaking the OT law is not only at odds with what the church teaches, but is even blasphemous.

Jesus did not violate Mosaic law. 

It certainly does not.

You are a godless clown.

Jesus did not violate the law.

Jesus loves you, faker.

Thomas is a caricature, there is nothing real about him. 

You are fooling no one, faker.

You would just ignore any refutimgs or findings anyway, because you are blinded by your own pride.

I believe what the church teaches, and the church teaches that Jesus was sinless and obeyed the law.

Yet you refuse to be corrected, so your "research" evidently had a predetermined conclusion that you are simply skewing the evidence to support.

You don't even believe in the God of the bible, you are simply being subversive. Dishonest too.

I don't believe Jesus violated the law by not taking it on himself to be enforcer. 

Harikrish is pretentious, and suffering from a severe case of prelest.

Yeah, and the one who wasn't killed was still BOILED ALIVE.

Nevermind about the countless martyrs since!

This is not an example of Jesus violating the law.

But it certainly is an example of mercy.

You are a godless clown.

What law did Jesus break?

Jesus did not break the law.

The pharisees tried to accuse Jesus of doing this for healing people on the sabbath and such.

A common mistake spiritual egotists such as yourself make is to think you are qualified to teach on whatever religion you arbitrarily decide you are an expert in.

Timothy didn't write the epistle to Timothy you biblically illiterate faker.

By all means, lead by example.

The so called "Christadelphians" are heretics, they aren't even really Christians.

But Romans did execute by crucifixion, and it was done on a cross.

What makes you think that 2 was ever intended to support 1?

What do you think my point is?

I dispute your claim that Jesus disobeyed the law of Moses.

But it was established early on in the church that gentile converts did not have to become Jews. 

"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

And so Christ voluntarily went to the cross, enduring humiliation, rising from the dead trampling down death by death.

If you were honest, you would not take something for the end that is not truly the end. The one you call liar and lunatic went to the cross even for your sake.

Why don't you go drink some of that holy sewer water from the Ganges or something and get mystical. Do some breathing exercises afterwords, and be mezmorized by the spiritual delusions you take as visions. Maybe one day you'll wake up, realize you are god, and make some Maseratis off of gullible yoga pants wearing housewives from California who still haven't figured out that stretching is something you do before exercising.

There have been African kings, and there have been brahmins who are slaves to their own ego.

Slavery was an unavoidable circumstance in life throughout most of human history.

The church doesn't avoid the hard subjects. It would be worse if nothing was said about slavery. 

For those who want, there is a wealth of writing material on the Mystagogy of the faith accumulated over our long ancient history. Openly available.

If I wasn't personally well aquainted with much of these writings of the church, I would not speak as I do.

But yes, you should learn with the guidance of a priest, which is simply due humility.

Do you know what it means to know everything? Of course, you know what that means. Do you know everything? Of course not.

The Bishop of Rome violated the 4th and 8th ecumenical councils by altering the creed, and so they have been booted from the church for over a thousand years.

Since then, they have only veered further and further away from Orthodoxy.

This is what I think of your barbaric religion so long as you are going to occupy yourself spreading lies about mine.

2nd largest communion of those calling themselves Christians in the world.

Since you are dishonest and don't care about what is true, I suggest you go off somewhere and stand on one foot until you are granted divinity.

We don't recognize the Pope as Catholic.

I read the first sentence you wrote and ignored the rest.

Hope you spent a lot of time writing it.

You do not get to tell me what I mean by my words, I am not a deceptive person.

Your problem is you take "The Ultimate Reality" to mean something other than what it means. If you took it to mean what it means, I am not saying anything that isn't patently obvious. 

And only accepting it as Reality As it Truly Is will our discipline, which has more to do with examining the self and removing that which clouds our judgement or compromises our honesty, make sense.

Instead you are superstitious and because you refuse to be humble about being ignorant, you are confused.

The Orthodox Catholic Church is the very church that began at pentecost with an unbroken lineage of every Bishop back to ordination by. the apostles.

What church do you belong to? I doubt you even belong to any.

But the answer to your question is in the next segment of the creed.

By all means, lead by example.

You are taking what I said out of context.

I more than likely said "If the Ultimate Reality is such and such, that is what it is".

Thst is not an admission of possibility, because you certainly gave other impossible scenarios.

The Ultimate Reality is exactly what it is. And it is all encompassing.

And that is what God is, my repeating this matter or even my silence on the matter has no impact on the veracity of this. This is what we mean by God.

You by denying this are wrong. And superstitious to boot.

The Ultimate Reality can't be "anything". It is what it is. To you it can be anything, because it is all arbitrary to you.