How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 I need to know how you feel about "jesus   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

I need to know how you feel about "jesus"

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Michelle_loves_Mike
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Senior Member
since 12-20-2003
Posts 1200
Pennsylvania


25 posted 01-20-2004 07:13 AM       View Profile for Michelle_loves_Mike   Email Michelle_loves_Mike   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Michelle_loves_Mike

Muslimah......Thank you for your views, and as a new comer to Passions, I welcome you


Denise,,,,,I dig what youre saying,,,,,but, he had given his views already,,,I'm still learning that people revisit and reply several times,,,,as you have here,,,,,alsso, it's cool you got the version cumfy to your ears,,,it makes sudying anything easier when you have a firm grasp of the language. Thank you


Ringo my dear, who asked you? KIDDING! I hear where you're comming from, and I realy like your response. And thats hockey puck, not shmuck....


Severn, thank you for your defense,,,,yes Ringo and I are close, and do tend to try to out insult each other,,most of which would probably get us banned from here, and someone coming to our homes with a bar of soap!,,btw,,,,whats your view of the subject?

Take care all
michelle

I wish all could find the true happiness I have found,,in the eyes of Mike

Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


26 posted 01-20-2004 07:14 AM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

On countless occasions, I bounced different biblical version interpretations against each other and against Strong's concordance of the bible... what did I find?

~ I found added passages and words coupled with misinterpretation of certain words and biased punctuation placements.

After studying some Egyptian religion history, it became quite apparent to me that Judaism was an off-shoot of that particular religion, just as christianity is an off-shoot of Judaism. No doubt in my mind that the ancient Egyptian religion was an off-shoot of a previous religion of a previous religion of a previous religion, and so forth.

For certain, there have been many "Jesus'" throughout mankind's history.
Michelle_loves_Mike
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Senior Member
since 12-20-2003
Posts 1200
Pennsylvania


27 posted 01-20-2004 07:20 AM       View Profile for Michelle_loves_Mike   Email Michelle_loves_Mike   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Michelle_loves_Mike

Opeth,,,thats what I was trying to say with my comment of slaughtering the inturpritation,,,,as many versions as you can find,,,you will find discrepensies,,,thats how it goes,,,like the telegraph game played in school,,,,,thank you
Michelle
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


28 posted 01-20-2004 10:24 AM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Opeth:

quote:
On countless occasions, I bounced different biblical version interpretations against each other and against Strong's concordance of the bible... what did I find?
~ I found added passages and words coupled with misinterpretation of certain words and biased punctuation placements.



Actually ambiguous areas where things had to be "interpreted" in the translation process were pretty rare.  Where there were questions, usually other passages of scripture provided the proper context.  And out of all the existing "fuzzy spots", none of the cardinal doctrines of Christianity are affected thereby.  In other words, the "confusion" is much less than some people state it is ... in fact it only presents the same problems that any translation process would.


Michelle:

quote:
Opeth,,,thats what I was trying to say with my comment of slaughtering the inturpritation,,,,as many versions as you can find,,,you will find discrepensies,,,thats how it goes,,,like the telegraph game played in school,,,,,thank you


Yes!  Exactly.  And just like the telegraph game we played in school, we still have access to the early documents to see where the few discrepancies occurred.  And so the later translations are mostly based upon the earliest manuscripts (The Alexandrian Type) ... which makes any argument as to corruption of text, an invalid argument.  

If you read extensively in the popular translations of the Bible (KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, etc...), you will find that they are SO similar ... just like two different translations of Augustine's "Confessions" would be.  The differences are mostly stylistic, and have to do with choosing between a literal word for word approach, or a dynmaic equivalent approach (focusing on meaning rather than matching exact words).  Actually most of the modern translations represent a good balance between the two approaches.  


quote:
but, he had given his views already,,,I'm still learning that people revisit and reply several times


Michelle, I was not repeating my original response.  I was only responding to the new things you said, about translations and textual corruption.  I've studied this to some degree, and have found that most assumptions out there about it are just grossly mistaken.  No hard feelings.  I love the Bible.  And so I tend to go correcting, when I hear wrong ideas about it.  I don't only love the Bible, but people too.  And since I think it matters what people think about it, and its trustworthiness ... I do it to help others.  I don't pretend to know everything about it.   But it is a highly important and interesting subject to me ... and directly related to who Jesus is.


Stephen.      
Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


29 posted 01-20-2004 10:33 AM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

"Yes!  Exactly.  And just like the telegraph game we played in school, we still have access to the early documents to see where the few discrepancies occurred.  And so the later translations are mostly based upon the earliest manuscripts (The Alexandrian Type) ... which makes any argument as to corruption of text, an invalid argument."

~ I absolutely disagree with that above statement. The telegraph game Michelle is speaking about, which I believe is most likely to be the same as the navy's "Haley's Comment" lesson in communication game, in the case of biblical translations would have taken place prior to the writing of the documents, but to the actual reporting of events. In other words, the telegraph game as it relates to biblical translation occured prior to the writings. Upon the writings, the stories told most likely changed dramatically - as it does when we in the navy perform the Haley's Comet routine, but then doe not change at all after the order is written.
  
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


30 posted 01-20-2004 10:39 AM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

quote:
In other words, the telegraph game as it relates to biblical translation occured prior to the writings. Upon the writings, the stories told most likely changed dramatically



Ah, but that's an entirely different argument than "textual corruption".  The argument that the story itself was skewed in the transmission from life to writing (which was a very short time ... in a culture for whom meticulous oral traditions were a way of life).  

I'll give you the burden of proof.  What is your evidence that what was first written is not what happened?


Stephen.
Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


31 posted 01-20-2004 10:50 AM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

"Ah, but that's an entirely different argument than "textual corruption".  The argument that the story itself was skewed in the transmission from life to writing (which was a very short time ... in a culture for whom meticulous oral traditions were a way of life)."

~ Ah, but on top of stories being told and finally written after many years of being told, there was also textual corruption through misinterpretations and biases.

And the burden of proof is not on my side. Although I can easily use common sense to justify my stance - zealots of a man named Jesus tell tall tales about his works, which continue to change and evolve into what we know to be legendary or mythical. It happens quite frequently with events that occur. Look at the story of the private who was rescued in an Iraqi hospital - my how the story grew into a tale of deep bravery and courage - and that happened within days after the event - for sure, decades and scores after Christ, could not the same occur about his doings/works?

Quite logically, the answer in my mind is an emphatic - YES.  
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


32 posted 01-20-2004 12:05 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

quote:
...decades and scores after Christ



Opeth,

I am glad that your shift to this argument shows that the textual corruption one isn't so easy to defend.  But alas, neither is this one.


You fail to understand the nature of historical report.  For rarely (if ever?) have historical accounts been written with the blinding immediacy that you are requiring.  Using your standard, we should be skeptical about most of the history of Western Civilization.  


It's pretty well established that the Synoptic Gospels were written from 1) Oral traditions 2) Written Fragments 3) Mutual dependence upon other Synoptic writers, and testimonies of eye-witnesses.  

Mark- written in the 50s or early 60s (possibly late as 70)

Matthew- written from the early 50s to 70s (early or late, depending upon which view is held about Mark having been used as a common source)

Luke- written from the 50s to the 70s (early or late, also depending upon the Mark hypothesis)


Seeing that the end of Jesus' Earthly ministry was around the mid to late 30s, some of these accounts were written as early as 10-15 years later, with good reason to believe that the writings came from other earlier writings, testimonies, etc... In other words, the synoptic Gospels were compilations, not first time writings out of thin air.  


Consider the wording of the beginning of Luke:

quote:
Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.  Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

(Luke 1:1-4)



So your theory of a break in continuity, or perversion, is just your assumption.  And your use of phrases like "decades and scores after Christ" only obscures the facts.  This is no different than how historical happenings in general were passed along during that time.  Comparing that with the Iraqi story does nothing ... The Western paradigm of sensationalistic media, cannot be superimposed upon 1st Century Palestine.


Stephen.
    
Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


33 posted 01-20-2004 12:48 PM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

"So your theory of a break in continuity, or perversion, is just your assumption."

As is your assumption that what was written is exactly as it happened. The onus is on neither of us - that is why you must rely on faith believe in what you believe. Unlike me, I rely on common sense and the sheer (imo) unsoundness that a ONE god only religion over all others is THE only way, and that that ONE god's religion can't even come together as ONE church (and I am just scratching the surface on this separate issue).

"And your use of phrases like "decades and scores after Christ" only obscures the facts.  This is no different than how historical happenings in general were passed along during that time."

~ I think not. I have read accounts of historical data from the actual source who was actually there and whose voice was actually recorded - but not only that, this person, as many others when deciphering historcial matters were not zealots to a cause. Religous zealots are the worst when it comes to trumping up their religious beliefs. Politicians are a close second. It is no surprise to me that those who lived with Jesus were fanatics and his stories grew into tall-tales. Just look at Jim Jones and he was (as Senator Kennedy would put it) "no Jesus" - but he had people believing that he WAS GOD incarnate. Look at all the faith healers and the people who will swear to their own God that these faith healers are performing acts like jesus performed - and you won't allow the possibility that Jesus' people could not of done the same?

"Comparing that with the Iraqi story does nothing ... The Western paradigm of sensationalistic media, cannot be superimposed upon 1st Century Palestine."

~ It can't? Says who? You. Based on what grounds? I say it can and probably was much less sensational than what happened to a much younger and much more dupable human society as was in the 1st Century Palestine.

Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


34 posted 01-20-2004 04:21 PM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

Please understand that my opinion is just that, opinion. I don't claim it as fact,
nor is there an aim to offend those of the christian faith. The books are so incredibly
open to interpretation and the history of the early church so convoluted that I fear
we'll never have enough evidenceto know for sure. My comments are based upon
my own readings of the bible as well as some interesting books on the topic.

Jesus in my opinion, was a wise and charismatic leader. His words were not
meant to be taken as a reformation of the Jewish faith but a restoration of
it. He was a fundamentalist. The Temple in the time of Jesus is a temple under
Roman rule. It was lax, in the eyes of Jesus and his followers, in observing the
Law. Jesus sought to restore the strict adherence to the law in much the same
way the Maccabaens had done under Hellenized Jerusalem.

Mattiathias Maccabaeus,  a priest, was ordered by a Greek officer to make a
sacrifice on a pagan altar, against Judaic law. In a  "zeal for the law' he killed the
soldier and a Jew who had complied, and retreated to the countryside where he
drew people to his cause. This lead to a full scale revolt and in time the Maccabaen
dynasty who restored the temple and priesthood to a strict adherence to the Law.

That's not to say Jesus was inciting a full scale revolt against the Romans, although
it would make clearer comments like ""Do not think that I have come to bring peace
on earth. I have not come to bring peace but a sword." Whatever his eventual intent,
peaceful or revolutionary, Jesus was an adherent of the Law and used his knowledge
of the Bible to give weight to his words and movement.

To further the idea that Jesus was not there to change but to preserve the law is the
passage:

(Matt 5:17-19)

"Do not imagine that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets..but to complete
them..not one dot, not one little stroke shall disappear from the Law until its purpose
is achieved. Therefore the man who infringes even one of the least of these commandments
and teaches others to do the same will be considered the least in the Kingdom of Heaven"

Yet Christianity and Roman Catholicism did/do  infringe upon some of these laws.  
To get a glimpse of how and where the change between the original cult of Jesus and what
becomes christianity one must read Acts of the NT. It's here we're introduced to the
enigmatic and in my opinon, shady, character Saul Of Tarsus, better known as Paul. As
Nietzche once said it is under Paul that Jesus and his teachings are essentially  'pulled
from underneath the Jews'.
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


35 posted 01-20-2004 09:40 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

quote:
Look at all the faith healers and the people who will swear to their own God that these faith healers are performing acts like jesus performed - and you won't allow the possibility that Jesus' people could not of done the same?

and ...
quote:
it ... probably was much less sensational than what happened to a much younger and much more dupable human society as was in the 1st Century Palestine.



Well, I'm glad to see that you've retreated from 1) The documents have been corrupted, to 2) There was too much time between the events and the first documentation, to 3) His disciples were duped, or they lied.  


Actually I knew it would take this progression since positions 1 & 2 are untenable, and you weren't able to offer anything to defend them.  


Now that you have landed at the hallucination theories, or the fabrication theories, you'll have to do what scholars have been unable to do thus far ... offer cogent reasons why Christianity wasn't squelched early on, by the Romans or Jews presenting the body of Jesus ... proving that the resurrection narrative was a farce.  Remember that Christianity was considered a divisive sect by the Jews ... and a threat by the Romans.  (They often made public examples of Zealot groups and "Messiahs" in order to ensure that there would be no uprisings against Roman Rule.)


Before you say something like, "Jesus may have never existed", or "he may have never been crucified", know that these facts are pretty much accepted as indisputable by NT scholars ... believers or not.  Gary Habermas has presented 12 indisputable facts for which he argues that the resurrection of Jesus is the only rational explanation.  He then trimmed it down to 4 or 5 "Core" facts.  These core facts are:

1. Jesus died by Roman crucifixion

2. The disciples "claimed" to have seen the risen Christ.

3. The birth of the Christian Church, which for the Jews entailed:

a. Abandoning the sacrificial system
b. Abandoning an emphasis on keeping the law of Moses
c. Abandoning the Sabbath Day (4th Commandment), for Sunday worship
d. Abandoning the Jewish conception of the Messiah (Christ) as political king or conqueror who would liberate the Jews from the tyranny of Rome.

4. The conversion of Paul.

5. The conversion of James.


In light of these facts ... hallucination theories, and fabrication theories fall short.  To believe them would actually exceed any "faith" that is demanded by accepting the NT as is.  
And I have said all of this, not to present some meta-argument that the whole of Christianity must be believed because it is historically tenable, but to show that the allegation of a dubious history is false.  It just removes one more stumbling block out of the way, for those who might too easily believe you when you say the historical foundations of Christianity are doubtful.  



Stephen.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


36 posted 01-20-2004 10:06 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Raph,

An alternative to Nietzche for your consideration:

Correct, Jesus was not sent to abolish the law, but to fulfill it on behalf of those who couldn't. It is done away with (practically)when "its purpose is achieved", i.e., leading people to the rest (from self-labor)found in Christ, which was/is its intent. We don't have to go on fulfilling what Christ has already fulfilled on our behalf.

You'll also find in the Scriptures that the Law was given to Israel alone anyway, not to the nations. The Gentile nations were not/are not under Israel's law anymore than I am under Canadian statutes, or you are under U.S. statutes. In the book of Romans you will find that God states that the Gentile nations are guided only by the constraints of conscience, being foreigners and aliens regarding God's dealings with and promises to Israel. Even though Gentiles are not legally under the law given to Israel, it goes without saying that they also couldn't keep it even if they were. Nobody is capable of keeping it, Jew or Gentile.

Jesus in his earthly ministry, along with the Twelve, were sent to minister only to the House of Israel, and most of their teachings concerned the qualifiations for entering the future coming earthly Kingdom of Christ on earth (the literal Thousand Year Reign in Jerusalem, not merely salvation), although you do see reference to the farther-reaching benefits of Christ's atonement for all mankind sprinkled throughout. This particular ministry of Jesus and the Twelve exclusively to the Jews is referred to as the Gospel of the Circumcision.

Paul was commissioned by the Ascended Lord Jesus to proclaim the Gospel of the Uncircumcision, to all the Gentile nations on the basis of faith alone in the Person and work of Christ. When you realize that two different ministries to two different groups of people are being discussed, the so-called contradictions that perplex so many simply disappear.



  
  
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


37 posted 01-20-2004 10:14 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Stephenos,
I think you should have been the one to put  things into books to begin with.  Things would have stayed in proper order and clarity.  The kind of clarity that you emphasize anything of Christianity has given me given me a much greater opinion than I ever had of Christianity and its beliefs.  It doesn't change the fact that I am confused about my own beliefs and spirituality; but it is more than a pleasure to come across some one who may keep things in order and clarity as you have always done in this forum.
Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


38 posted 01-20-2004 11:21 PM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

You'll also find in the Scriptures that the Law was given to Israel alone anyway, not to the nations

Exactly, Denise this is my point. The teachings of Jesus were not intended for gentiles. It's only under Paul
that they come down to us as he did not adhere to the law and was repeatedly warned against this by James
and the disciples.

Paul was commissioned by the Ascended Lord Jesus to proclaim the Gospel of the Uncircumcision, to all
the Gentile nations on the basis of faith alone in the Person and work of Christ. When you realize that two different ministries to two different groups of people are being discussed, the so-called contradictions that perplex so
many simply disappear.


Simply disappear? Perhaps for some Denise but I don't find it that simple at all. Suddenly there is a schism
between the early sects which begins under Paul. Essentially the real Jesus, known to the James and the
disciples and on the other hand that of Paul's based on a desert vision (the ascended Christ).  A vision that
occurs as he is hunting for those very disciples to arrest and bring back bound to the Jerusalem.

When his history is viewed, Paul's character can be considered questionable. He is twice admonished by
James for not adhering to the law. He admits this freely and even accepts the punishment of purification
for four days. He then, however, continues to undermine the sect with his own brand of teaching. Not only
separating himself  from them in 2 Corinthians 11:

"But I am afraid, lest..your minds be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.
For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached..For I consider myself
not in the least inferior to the most eminent of apostles"

he then denounces them

"What I am doing I will continue to do, that I may cut off opportunity from those who desire
an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the manner about which they are boasting.
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers disguising themselves as apostles of Christ"

It falls in the end, to a matter of faith. Who do you believe?  You have on the one hand James (whom many
believe to be the brother of Jesus) and the disciples who knew Jesus, and on the other Paul. The flesh and blood
and friends of Jesus and Paul formerly Saul of Tarsus member of what could be considered the Temple's Brute
Squad. A man who never knew Jesus, but for a vision.  A man so deeply rooted against Jesus and his followers,
that he stood by with approval as Stephen the first martyr was stoned. That his vision and conversion just happen
to come while he is searching for the very people he has asked the High priest's permission to round up is considered suspicious to some.


The more I look at Paul the less I believe.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


39 posted 01-21-2004 12:14 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Most of the teachings of Jesus were meant only for the Jews. There were some truths that He taught that were applicable for all mankind.


quote:
That his vision and conversion just happen
to come while he is searching for the very people he has asked the High priest's permission to round up is considered suspicious to some.


And nothing short of miraculous to others.    

I'll have to digest the rest of your points tomorrow night. It's waaaay past my bedtime, Raph. Goodnight!
Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


40 posted 01-21-2004 02:23 AM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

I can't argue with that Denise, all movements be they spiritual or political, contain messages and truths applicable to many. Especially in the hands and speech of an intelligent and charismatic leader.

As for the miraculous, well one should approach miracles with caution. It is an incredibly easy and bad habit of the church to fall back on this when questions arise that are not easily answered or call to question the faith.

Years ago, I believe it was in New York, there was a vision of Mary found in a greasy window. Many people visited the site out of curiosity and many to pray, calling it a miracle. Now many christians/catholics, who do believe in miracles, had the sense to say it was just a coincedence or that it was outright ridiculous.

In the same way many can do the same with regards to Paul. There are too many questions raised about him and while the faithful can easily dismiss them I cannot. Whatever his personal intention I'm too wary of Paul to believe in his miraclulous vision and Jesus' sudden turn in 'policy' left in his hands and not the disciples.

It's my opinion that what Paul did not change or distort the early church and it's catering to a pagan audience did. And in doing so the truth behind Jesus, his teachings and his history have been lost or buried.
hush
Senior Member
since 05-27-2001
Posts 1693
Ohio, USA


41 posted 01-21-2004 03:11 AM       View Profile for hush   Email hush   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for hush

Michelle, Stephen's a nice guy, and he's also pretty smart. I've observed both he and Denise to not only know their Bible, but to know a lot about their faith as a whole. They are people you can learn things from... it doesn't help to become defensive.

I know I've picked things up from Stephen, and I'm still a happily undecided agnostic. (BTW Stephen... hi!)

Now, I always thought part of the strength of the Bible was that there were four accounts of Christ's life included. Kind of there for comparison, I guess?

One thing I'm wondering... which gospel was it that talked about his youth? (I think it was Gospel of St. Thomas). I remember my religion professor reading us a passage from it, and if memory serve, the young Jesus used his miraculous powers to turn some other kids into animals (sparrows?) and poor old Joseph had to deal with how to discipline him... a kind of eerie resemblance to the Twilight Zone episode with the kid who sends people and htings he doesn't like out into the crnfields by wishing it, seems to me.

Anyway, he explained that it wasn't included Biblically b/c it was too far off from what more solidly documented records showed Christ's character to be... and also that the Gnostics were kind of an extremist ofshoot anyway. But I wonder, aren't texts like that valuable, if only for comparison purposes?

Anyway, Jesus... man or messiah? I dunno. Probably sounds pretty apathetic, but it's not something I'm significantly armed to decide right now. Maybe someday I will be.
Michelle_loves_Mike
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Senior Member
since 12-20-2003
Posts 1200
Pennsylvania


42 posted 01-21-2004 05:33 AM       View Profile for Michelle_loves_Mike   Email Michelle_loves_Mike   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Michelle_loves_Mike

such wonderful things you are all stating,,,,,and as you can see, we all stand firm behind our beliefs,,,no matter what they are, where they come from, or what they may be based on,,,form blind faith,,,to scholar based,,,,,,this is what I wanted to see, thank you all,,,stephan,,opeth,,denise,,,,,,,,,,
and Hush,,
I wasnt being defensive,,,,I just wanted discussion on the topic,,,,believe me,,if you ever saw me on defense mode,,you'd see the difference! ha ha
and, hats of to the obvious intellegence behind all you all have had to say....
dig it,,,I do believe this is post #5oo for me,,,,,,time flies!
Michelle

I wish all could find the true happiness I have found,,in the eyes of Mike

Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


43 posted 01-21-2004 07:37 AM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

"Well, I'm glad to see that you've retreated from 1) The documents have been corrupted, to 2) There was too much time between the events and the first documentation, to 3) His disciples were duped, or they lied."

~ No. I never did. The documents have been corrupted. There was indeed enough time between the actual occurance of events and the writing of these events, allowing the zealots of christ to tell tall-tales. His disciples were duped, indeed, into believing that this man, if he ever existed, was in fact a godman of some sort of extension of the ancient Egyptian belief of a triune god.

There are various issues here, some interconnecting, some moreso off on a tangent, and I really don't have the time to discuss them all. In fact in your latter part of this reply, you have completely diverted back to issues that we have argued in the past. Briefly the Sabbath - it was before the laws of Moses, the apostles were still obeying the command after Christ's death and it was never done away with or changed to sunday - but that is just one issue off the subject matter at hand.  

I have read much about this subject. There is no proof that your god is the only god (if there is even a god to begin with).  Common sense and logic dictates that if there was a supreme being who "wills all to be saved" would allow herself to be known by her created people through many different means - not just one. Especially, when your bible lays down the rule that only those who have received the holy spirit through a conversion into accepting the godman as their personal saviour, can be saved - and biillions upon billions of people never even had a chance to know this godman - and then they for certain must be eternally damned to a hellfire because they didn't get a chance.

I find that to be totally and undeniably ridiculous.
Michelle_loves_Mike
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Senior Member
since 12-20-2003
Posts 1200
Pennsylvania


44 posted 01-21-2004 11:31 AM       View Profile for Michelle_loves_Mike   Email Michelle_loves_Mike   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Michelle_loves_Mike

opeth,
awsum reply, one point, about all the ones who never knew the "savior",,,supposedly, the "gates of hell were opened" when "jesus" dies,,,popular theory is that means the souls were released into "heaven" then....
A teaching of Jehovah Witnesses,,,,,states that , all the ones who died before, get awakened into the "1000 year reign of peace" on earth to get their rewards, when "jesus" comes back,,,,,
so, there are a few theories out there about the ones who never got the chance to get on the boat
Michelle

I wish all could find the true happiness I have found,,in the eyes of Mike

Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


45 posted 01-21-2004 11:48 AM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

"...one point, about all the ones who never knew the "savior",,,supposedly, the "gates of hell were opened" when "jesus" dies,,,popular theory is that means the souls were released into "heaven..."

~ Which only goes to show how contradicting and open for numerous interpretations the bible is.  I call that the "cop-out" answer because:

1. The bible states that there is only ONE way to be saved and that is to repent and accept Jesus and ONLY then can one receive the holy spirit - w/o the holy spirit one cannot be saved. The bible makes no exceptions.  And if my memory serves me correctly, the HS was not available until the Pentacost, which did not occur at the time of Jesus' death - or did he even die?

2. What were these people doing in hell in the first place? They weren't judged yet. You mean a god is going to cast people into a hell and then bring them out later only to judge them and throw them back in hell again (laughable!). And which hell are we talking about anyway - The Lake of Fire? That lake was dry at the time of Christ's death and doesn't come into existence until the book of revelations.

3. Did Christ actually die then? If he remained alive after his death, he never did actually die (thanatos). Why need a ressurection of a body if one merely "separates" from one's body upon death to float into heaven or sink into hell?

4. It is rather silly, isn't it, to suggest that the "gates of hell" opened when christ died and all of those who have never heard his name got a "free ticket" to heaven. Wait! They were never actually tempted then, were they? Even Christ was tempted. Not only that, if I were cast into a hell and all of a sudden here comes a god being telling me to believe on him in order to get my get out of jail for free card, I am going to think, "hmmmm, eternity in this hell or believe in this dude and get the hell (pun intended) outta here? I believe in you, brother!" I don't think one person would be left behind - they would ALL believe.

5. But the bible says that on man has entered heaven except the son of man. If these people went to heaven before christ did the bible then contradicts itself.

"A teaching of Jehovah Witnesses,,,,,states that , all the ones who died before, get awakened into the "1000 year reign of peace" on earth to get their rewards, when "jesus" comes back,,,,,
so, there are a few theories out there about the ones who never got the chance to get on the boat"


~ That actually makes much more sense and was similiar to what I believed when I was a christian. Then, every person gets their one and only chance to be saved. Of course, some will still refuse, but others will accept. However, I was not a Jehovah's Witness.

Michelle_loves_Mike
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Senior Member
since 12-20-2003
Posts 1200
Pennsylvania


46 posted 01-21-2004 12:01 PM       View Profile for Michelle_loves_Mike   Email Michelle_loves_Mike   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Michelle_loves_Mike

the "holy spirit" was talked of before the pentacost,,(i.e. the tounges of fire on their heads),,,it was mentioned as a dove, when john baptised jesus,,,,
as for the aforementioned gates, opening, free tickets,,,,it never made sense to me either
..lake of fire,,,,the studies i ran amuck in,,,,poitnt that the belief of a fiery hell was born in a garbage dump,,,,,,
Gehanna was a garbage dump outside the city,,,where they kept the fires burning all the time,,,,,hence,,bad and dead things were tossed into an ever burning fire,,,,as far as god, and tossing souls into eternal fires,,,,in the old testament,,,,it speaks of Molech,,,,pagan god extraordinaire,,,,,anyway,,,people would toss their own kids into the fire that burned in the belly of Molech,,,,god says,,that sort of thing sickens him,,,and would never come into his heart
just a few morsels
Michelle


I wish all could find the true happiness I have found,,in the eyes of Mike
Opeth
Member Elite
since 12-13-2001
Posts 2224
The Ravines


47 posted 01-21-2004 02:49 PM       View Profile for Opeth   Email Opeth   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Opeth

The holy spirit was talked about, but was not given to the newly converted until the day of pentacost.

As for gehenna, yep I know about that. Hell has been translated from at least 4 words.

Did you know that the bible refers to souls (nephesh) as being dead and that dead animals are actually called dead souls?

In fact, today's mainstream christianity is proof positive of the ever-changing human creation of religious doctrines and beliefs. It wasn't until christianity teachings began to fuse with the teachings of Plato and Socrates did the idea of the immortal soul take hold in christian thought. Even Augustine quotes Plato in his ascertion that the soul is immortal. Of course, later, stemming from that belief, a writer named Dante Aligieri wrote The Divine Comedy and as the years past, the whole hellfire and brimstone and suffering and purgatory, etc fused with the immortal soul doctrine, creating a fearful plight for all of those who refuse to accept, or simply don't understand the concept of a saviour who picked a bad point in time to make himself known as lord of lords. He should of came today. We could of at least recorded his words and video taped his speeches.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


48 posted 01-21-2004 03:28 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

If you don't find the bible a good cushion, that is because people keep putting pins in it.
Michelle_loves_Mike
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Senior Member
since 12-20-2003
Posts 1200
Pennsylvania


49 posted 01-21-2004 09:42 PM       View Profile for Michelle_loves_Mike   Email Michelle_loves_Mike   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Michelle_loves_Mike

Opeth,,,seens you and I share a lot of the same ideas,,,,,esso,,,,true
Michelle

I wish all could find the true happiness I have found,,in the eyes of Mike

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> I need to know how you feel about "jesus   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors