Reply
Wed 21 Sep, 2005 04:10 am
John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life. (The ultimate proof of God's love.)
But then...
For so much did man love himself that he nailed god's only begotten son on across and paraded him through the world for thousands of years. (The ultimate proof of man's love for himself)
I'm just confused, that's all. I just can't shake the notion that jesus was killed because he was in the way of dishonesty and oportunity. He was a nuisance to his contemporaries, so they got rid of him.
I am confused also. Suppose a couple conceived a child with the intention of manipulating their other children into killing the baby, but claimed it was necessary to sacrifice the baby in order to avoid punishing their other children for less than perfect behavior. Suppose the parents withhold forgiveness from any child who does not watch a video of the gruesome murder and thank them for doing it. We would consider them evil, not loving.
Suppose that a God had ordered his followers to kill any false prophet who tried to get them to disregard his laws and covenant with them. Suppose that this god then impregnated a girl and inspired her bastard child to preach against the religious tenets as espoused by his accredited priests and religious leaders. This self-styled prophet even claimed that God was his real father, but their study of scriptures made it unthinkable for God to need or want a biological son. Those who loved God and followed his orders to the letter would have no choice other than to kill the man.
Jesus may well have been killed for political reasons, but it is completely illogical to believe that God is or was incapable of forgiving sins without bloodshed. If you are not worthy of eternal life on your own merits, killing someone else does not magically make you a better person.
Terry wrote:I am confused also. Suppose a couple conceived a child with the intention of manipulating their other children into killing the baby, but claimed it was necessary to sacrifice the baby in order to avoid punishing their other children for less than perfect behavior. Suppose the parents withhold forgiveness from any child who does not watch a video of the gruesome murder and thank them for doing it. We would consider them evil, not loving.
One particular distinction that should be made is that according to the bible, Jesus went to his death willingly. However, the rest of the above fits rather well.
Terry wrote:
Suppose that a God had ordered his followers to kill any false prophet who tried to get them to disregard his laws and covenant with them. Suppose that this god then impregnated a girl and inspired her bastard child to preach against the religious tenets as espoused by his accredited priests and religious leaders. This self-styled prophet even claimed that God was his real father, but their study of scriptures made it unthinkable for God to need or want a biological son. Those who loved God and followed his orders to the letter would have no choice other than to kill the man.
According to the bible, this is exactly what god did, and apparently for those exact reasons. Boggles the mind, doesn't it?
Terry wrote:
Jesus may well have been killed for political reasons, but it is completely illogical to believe that God is or was incapable of forgiving sins without bloodshed. If you are not worthy of eternal life on your own merits, killing someone else does not magically make you a better person.
Not completely illogical. The nature of religious sacrifice before Jesus was introduced into the picture was that by killing an animal in the ritual way, your sins would be transferred to that animal and thus you would be absolved and forgiven of said sins. It's not entirely known why God had the sudden shift in thought, perhaps he realized that the current goat population wouldn't be able to sustain the rapid growth of humanity.
This is one of the parts that I struggle with. I have some knowledge of the nature of man, and this dramatic shift in the ideology of Christianity smacks of a lazy following that no longer wished to go through all the bother of performing the rituals of sacrifice. Thus the story of Jesus and the "One sacrifice to cover all" dogma arises. Much like the industrial revolution made work easier for man, there is a rather obvious pattern throughout the bible of things getting easier for the believers. And the industrial revolution was inspired not by god, but by man.
Questioner wrote:Terry wrote:I am confused also. Suppose a couple conceived a child with the intention of manipulating their other children into killing the baby, but claimed it was necessary to sacrifice the baby in order to avoid punishing their other children for less than perfect behavior. Suppose the parents withhold forgiveness from any child who does not watch a video of the gruesome murder and thank them for doing it. We would consider them evil, not loving.
One particular distinction that should be made is that according to the bible, Jesus went to his death willingly. However, the rest of the above fits rather well.
Well..since you agree with everything Terry posted but this one thing...and since Terry is my favorite poster here in A2K...I thought I would comment on the one disagreement.
Did Jesus go willingly to his death?
There is at least the possibility that Jesus thought himself to be the son of God. Maybe he went to what might be his execution supposing that his postion would cause "his father" to grant a last minute reprieve...that phone call from the governor the movies always show the warden awaiting.
On the cross, Jesus supposedly asked: Why hast thou forsaken me?
What do you suppose that was about?
Frank Apisa wrote:
There is at least the possibility that Jesus thought himself to be the son of God. Maybe he went to what might be his execution supposing that his postion would cause "his father" to grant a last minute reprieve...that phone call from the governor the movies always show the warden awaiting.
On the cross, Jesus supposedly asked: Why hast thou forsaken me?
What do you suppose that was about?
Well, according to christian writings he said that more or less to fulfill a prophecy. It is argued that since god could not tolerate anything evil in his presence, that by dropping that last line Jesus was proving that he had, in fact, taken the sins of the world upon himself.
"Matthew 20:19 - and deliver him to the Gentiles to be mocked and scourged and crucified, and he will be raised on the third day." "
Apparently he knew what was coming. Went along with it anyway.
Frank,
What 'that' was about was the fact that Christ took upon himself all the sins of the world and at that second became sin Himself.
I find that point rather small in comparison to the fact that Christ was raised three days later from the dead and ascended into heaven.
If Christ didn't complain about what He was going through and if He accepted it, why should anyone else have a problem with it.
And Cyracuz, I know I have seen that first comment of yours somewhere. Ah, yes, my signature. LOL
Momma Angel wrote:Frank,
What 'that' was about was the fact that Christ took upon himself all the sins of the world and at that second became sin Himself.
I find that point rather small in comparison to the fact that Christ was raised three days later from the dead and ascended into heaven.
If Christ didn't complain about what He was going through and if He accepted it, why should anyone else have a problem with it.
And Cyracuz, I know I have seen that first comment of yours somewhere. Ah, yes, my signature. LOL
Interesting bunch of guesses. But I suspect it might not have done Jesus any good to do anything other than to "accept" what was happening. The Romans were not much for accepting "I am God" as a reason for stopping an execution.
Yes, momma angel. Your signature was what triggered the whole thing.
When it comes to Jesus I am inclined to disregard everything except the things he supposedly said himself. I don't care if he rose from the dead, or if someone just played puppet master with his corpse. It's irrellevant. The greatness of jesus was something he earned while alive, as a man. Wether he was god incarnated or just another joe with a keen moral I don't know, and it's not important. What is important to me is the timeless wisdom he taught.
Re: god loves man, loves man not god.
Cyracuz wrote:John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.
I'm not surprised you are confused if you believe in the literal truth of this myth.
The World presumably means mankind. How does making a human sacrifice demostrate love of mankind? It would only be outstandingly impressive if Jesus had firmly established himself as the Son of God. How many times does he claim divinity in the bible?
Moreover the very first phrase is just another example (this time from Christians) of second guessing God. You must prove the validity of your assumptions before you start building an elaborate theory on them.
Lol.. All of christianity is a big second guessing of god.
Quote:You must prove the validity of your assumptions before you start building an elaborate theory on them.
Do you suppose that the people who voted on jesus' divinity many hundreds of years ago proved the validity of their assumptions first? Jesus' divinity is a pretty elaborate theory.
The thing that confuses me is how christians can press jesus to their hearts while they celebrate his demise like a conquering victor. It is a cheap hoax, nothing more. Real substance is found in the teachings of jesus, not on the crusifix. Jesus is dead, he isn't there anymore. So I climbed down off the cross and found the words he said while he was here. Among others: "There is no institution between man and god." Only one of many the church conveniently disregarded.
Of course its not just Christians. Muslims and Jews are pretty adept at telling anyone who will listen what God likes and dislikes.
Its the sheer arrogance of these people that annoys me. They will not accept that they dont really know, that in fact they are ASSUMING a great deal. How arrogant is it to say you KNOW the mind of God Himself? And is it any wonder when they are confronted by other people who have the presumption to come to different conclusions about what God wants, that the disagreements start and the killing begins?
Frank Apisa wrote:
Interesting bunch of guesses. But I suspect it might not have done Jesus any good to do anything other than to "accept" what was happening. The Romans were not much for accepting "I am God" as a reason for stopping an execution.
Ironically, it wasn't the Roman's but the Jews that insisted Jesus was crucified, according to the bible. The Romans were perfectly willing to let him go.
However the point still stands that he didn't run and hide, but rather walked straight into the heart of the city whose leaders wanted him dead and basically said "here I am".
Steve wrote:
Quote:How arrogant is it to say you KNOW the mind of God Himself?
Not at all. I do. It is only arrogant to say you know the mind of god if you don't know it, wich is the case with most religious people.
I do know the mind of god, or I am learning it. What I know is that nothing that is possible to do is in defiance with god's will. I know that god's verdict on ALL HUMANS is equal. In fact, it's (god's) verdict on all of creation is equal. To god, a human and an amoeba are equally puny, or equally great.
Also, I know that god is too vast for anyone to comprehend fully. Luckily I know that it is possible to accuire flawless understanding without knowing everything. It's simple. You just have to understand what little you know. For the rest, trust that nature does what's best.
And lastly, I know that I am the most arrogant bastard of all here today.
Frank,
Christ, as the Son of God, had authority over everyone on earth. Had He chosen not to be crucified, He could have stopped it at any time.
Cyracuz, if you are inclined to disregard everything except the things Jesus 'supposedly' (your word) said Himself, you are obviously disregarding his telling of how "the temple would be destroyed but raised again in three days?" He was talking about Himself here and His death and His resurrection.
And His death and resurrection may be irrelevant to you, and if it is I don't understand why you would point it out as false then anyway, as it is not relevant? The greatness of Jesus is that He is the Son of God and He sacrificed Himself for the rest of the world. If you had a friend or a brother that jumped in front of a bullet for you, would you call that irrelevant?
The wisdom of Christ is timeless. But, let me ask you something. If, you find His teachings so full of wisdom, why then do you choose to disregard so much of it (according to what is written in the Bible?). I have been accused of disregarding or discarding a lot of the Bible. What makes us different in this respect then?
Cyracuz, I am sorry you believe John 3:16 is a myth. Again, you are asking that God or Christ would prove who He is. How many times does He claim divinity in the Bible? Well, I would suppose that would depend on what you have disregarded and what you have not.
And a conquering victor. Most definitely. He conquered sin and He conquered death.
You may feel Jesus isn't there anymore but He is. He is there for the world. If one chooses not to believe this, it does not make it any less a fact that HE IS there.
Steve, you call what I profess to believe and the fact that I believe it so strongly arrogance? I have never said I know the mind of God Himself. What I said was that I believe in my heart what laws He has laid down for mankind and that He loves us all.
And I haven't killed a single person for not believing what I believe. If you will remember, I do my best to understand what others think and believe and have a non-combative discussion with them. How many times have I asked others not to accuse and demean?
And Questioner is correct. Pontious Pilate tried to send Christ back to the Jewish Priests to handle Christ, as he felt that it was not Roman law that was at issue. It was the Jewish Priests that kept sending Him back to the Romans. The Jewish people were also given the choice of letting Christ go and Barrabas to die/and vice versa, but the Jewish people chose to let Barrabas go ~ a known thief and murderer, and political enemy.
And, finally Cyracuz, if you make the statement ......which is the case with most religious people, are you not stating then that you know more of the mind of God than they do because you have decided they are wrong?
What you know is that nothing that is possible to do is in defiance with God's will? God's verdict on all humans is equal? To God, a human and amoeba are equally puny or equally great? It sounds pretty much to me that you are saying you KNOW the mind of God. And, you also seem to be saying that it is okay to do anything? Does this mean there is no sin in your eyes? I am just going from your statement here so if I am incorrect, please let me know.
And I don't understand why you would take pleasure in being arrogant?
Momma Angel wrote:Frank,
Christ, as the Son of God, had authority over everyone on earth. Had He chosen not to be crucified, He could have stopped it at any time.
Right!
And I can cause a volcano to arise and erupt anywhere and anytime I want...but I just choose not to do so.
NOT!
In any case...these are some interesting guesses...even if they are blind, wild guesses...
...and I thank you for sharing them.
And...strange as it may seem to someone who doesn't think this through...
...I am also the most humble.
Frank Apisa wrote:Momma Angel wrote:Frank,
Christ, as the Son of God, had authority over everyone on earth. Had He chosen not to be crucified, He could have stopped it at any time.
Right!
And I can cause a volcano to arise and erupt anywhere and anytime I want...but I just choose not to do so.
NOT!
In any case...these are some interesting guesses...even if they are blind, wild guesses...
...and I thank you for sharing them.
Why do you keep saying "guesses"? You're arguing fiction against many people that have read the novel several times. What's the point? Most of the things argued are, in fact, in the bible. Therefore they aren't guesses, but known statements which appear in said book. Did it happen as it is stated in the bible? Probably not. But since you're essentially arguing against what is actually written down, no matter how outrageous it may be, you're actually the one that comes across as "guessing".
Not trying to be beligerent here, as I have decent enough respect for you given the other threads in which you've debated. This one seems rather a lost cause to me.
Everyone,
When I cannot find the words to sufficiently answer a question, I do my best to research until I can find a way to do it. I got this answer from gotquestions.org. This is the best explanation of offering "proof" of God as I have found.
Question: Is God Real? How Can I Know for Sure that God is Real?
Answer: We know that God is real because He has revealed Himself to us in three ways: in creation, in His Word, and in His Son, Jesus Christ.
The most basic proof of God's existence is simply what He has made. "For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that [unbelievers] are without excuse" (Romans 1:20). "The heavens declare the glory of God / And the firmament sheweth His handiwork" (Psalm 19:1).
If I found a wristwatch in the middle of a field, I would not assume that it just "appeared" out of nowhere or that it had always existed. Based on the watch's design, I would assume it had a designer. But I see far greater design and precision in the world around us. Our measurement of time is not based on wristwatches, but on God's handiwork?-the regular rotation of the earth (and the radioactive properties of the cesium-133 atom). The universe displays great design, and this argues for a Great Designer.
If I found an encoded message, I would seek out a cryptographer to help break the code. My assumption would be that there is an intelligent sender of the message, someone who created the code. How complex is the DNA "code" that we carry in every cell of our bodies? Does not the complexity and purpose of DNA argue for an Intelligent Writer of the code?
Not only has God made an intricate and finely tuned physical world, He has also instilled a sense of eternity in the heart of every person (Ecclesiastes 3:11). Mankind has an innate perception that there is more to life than meets the eye, that there is an existence higher than this earthly routine. Our sense of eternity manifests itself in at least two ways: law-making and worship.
Every civilization throughout history has valued certain moral laws, which are surprisingly similar from culture to culture. For example, the ideal of love is universally esteemed, while the act of lying is universally condemned. This common morality?-this global understanding of right and wrong?-points to a Supreme Moral Being who gave us such scruples.
In the same way, people all over the world, regardless of culture, have always cultivated a system of worship. The object of worship may vary, but the sense of a "higher power" is an undeniable part of being human. Our propensity to worship accords with the fact that God created us "in His own image" (Genesis 1:27).
God has also revealed Himself to us through His Word, the Bible. Throughout scripture, the existence of God is treated as a self-evident fact (Genesis 1:1; Exodus 3:14). When Benjamin Franklin wrote his Autobiography, he did not waste time trying to prove his own existence. Likewise, God does not spend much time proving His existence in His book. The life-changing nature of the Bible, its integrity, and the miracles which accompanied its writing should be enough to warrant a closer look.
The third way in which God revealed Himself is through His Son, Jesus Christ (John 14:6-11). "In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us" (John 1:1, 14). In Jesus Christ "dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Colossians 2:9).
In Jesus' amazing life, He kept the entire Old Testament law perfectly and fulfilled the prophecies concerning the Messiah (Matthew 5:17). He performed countless acts of compassion and public miracles to authenticate His message and bear witness to His deity (John 21:24-25). Then, three days after His crucifixion, He rose from the dead, a fact affirmed by hundreds of eyewitnesses (1 Corinthians 15:6). The historical record abounds with "proof" of who Jesus is. As the Apostle Paul said, "This thing was not done in a corner" (Acts 26:26).
We realize that there will always be skeptics who have their own ideas concerning God and will read the evidence accordingly. And there will be some whom no amount of proof will convince (Psalm 14:1). It all comes down to faith (Hebrews 11:6).
Questioner wrote:Frank Apisa wrote:Momma Angel wrote:Frank,
Christ, as the Son of God, had authority over everyone on earth. Had He chosen not to be crucified, He could have stopped it at any time.
Right!
And I can cause a volcano to arise and erupt anywhere and anytime I want...but I just choose not to do so.
NOT!
In any case...these are some interesting guesses...even if they are blind, wild guesses...
...and I thank you for sharing them.
Why do you keep saying "guesses"?
Not to labor the point, but they are guesses. Or at least, it is my guess that they are guesses.
Quote:You're arguing fiction against many people that have read the novel several times. What's the point? Most of the things argued are, in fact, in the bible. Therefore they aren't guesses, but known statements which appear in said book.
They may well be, but I am not arguing that they are not in the Bible.
MA said "Christ, as the Son of God, had authority over everyone on earth. Had He chosen not to be crucified, He could have stopped it at any time."
I am of the opinion that this is a guess MA is making...based in large part on another guess she is making....that the Bible speaks the truth.
So I am really not out of line.
Quote: Did it happen as it is stated in the bible? Probably not. But since you're essentially arguing against what is actually written down, no matter how outrageous it may be, you're actually the one that comes across as "guessing".
Read the above...and if you are still of the same opinion when you do...let's discuss it.
(By the way....I most assuredly am guessing. Please never lose sight of that.)
Quote:Not trying to be beligerent here, as I have decent enough respect for you given the other threads in which you've debated. This one seems rather a lost cause to me.
I have lots of respect for you too, Questioner....and for MA as well.
But I have made a conscious decision never to let these kinds of things go by without some sort of response.
Whether or not it is a lost cause is problematic. I have had an inordinate amount of success in getting others to adopt the agnostic position.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace