Did Jesus REALLY exist?
13 Feb 2014, 10:25 am
DentArthurDent wrote:
Hang on, so what do you believe, most christians believe in Christ. They Believe in Christ of the bible, they believe that christ is the messiah, sent by god, and that whilst he brought a new covenant, the old one still stands.
However according to you, the bible is very much open to interpretation and nothing is to be taken at face value. So then what is the point of the bible, surely, taken to the logical. contemporary conclusion wikipedia supersedes the bible. If you can cherry pick the bible, taking from it what resonates with you and ignoring, or dismissing as falsehoods the bits you don't like, then surely the bible is nothing more than a collection of philosophical treatises. By extrapolation of your perspective the existence of Jesus as either a man or the son of god is also open to interpretation and dismissal even from believers in the Book.
To be honest I find your perspective far more objectionable than I do the perspective of the likes of Moviefan. The latter takes the whole story and accepts it warts and all, yet you think its ok to decide which bits fit your own personal prejudice and reject the rest. The bible is either the word of god or it is not. God, Jesus, The Satan and the other Arch Angels either exist or they do not.
However according to you, the bible is very much open to interpretation and nothing is to be taken at face value. So then what is the point of the bible, surely, taken to the logical. contemporary conclusion wikipedia supersedes the bible. If you can cherry pick the bible, taking from it what resonates with you and ignoring, or dismissing as falsehoods the bits you don't like, then surely the bible is nothing more than a collection of philosophical treatises. By extrapolation of your perspective the existence of Jesus as either a man or the son of god is also open to interpretation and dismissal even from believers in the Book.
To be honest I find your perspective far more objectionable than I do the perspective of the likes of Moviefan. The latter takes the whole story and accepts it warts and all, yet you think its ok to decide which bits fit your own personal prejudice and reject the rest. The bible is either the word of god or it is not. God, Jesus, The Satan and the other Arch Angels either exist or they do not.
I suggest a class in poetry...
Then perhaps you'll understand...
I'm serious the bible is not meant to be taken literally...
But..it CAN BE extremely hard for a literally thinking person to understand that...
Been there done that...
I am no longer a literally thinking person...through great and extreme effort..
i use to talk and write just like a friggin computer....
But the real power of epigenetics and neuroplasticity makes almost anything possible for a human being...
Our genetics are evolved for adaptation..for much more than most folks 'think' they can do....
AND IN MY OPINION..much of what is described as HIGHER FUNCTIONING AUTISM..IS A LEARNED PROCESS..IN RESTRICTING
THE EMPATHIC PATHWAY AREAS OF LEARNING ..AKA KNOWN AS SOCIAL COGNITON..AND OR EMOTIONAL
INTELLIGENCE..
AND FURTHERMORE..RESEARCH SUGGESTS THAT LOTS OF HIGHER FUNCTIONING AUTISTIC FOLKS DO NOT THINK THAT
MOVEMENT OR PHYSICAL EDUCATION..IS A NECESSARY PART OF LIFE...
WELL GUESS WHAT.. ACCORDING TO NATURE..
BOTH OF THESE TYPES OF INTELLIGENCE..
EMOTIONAL intelligence and physical intelligence are usually required for survival for a human being...
And for folks who think that culture and school provides all the answers..
In my opinion they are SADLY mistaken...
And furthermore just the ADHERENCE..to a computer screen or any other screen..rather than moving ALL AROUND IN A FLESH AND BLOOD WORLD..
IS A GREAT SOURCE OF HUMAN SUFFERING..WHETHER IT IS POOR EYESIGHT..PRE DIABETES..AT LEVELS OF A THIRD OF TEENAGERS..
OR ANTI-DEPRESSANTS..MOVING IN ON BEING PRESCRIBED TO MORE TEENAGERS THAN EVER BEFORE...
NOT MOVING CAN AND WILL DESTROY HEALTH..BOTH MENTAL AND PHYSICAL..
AND should JUST be COMMON SENSE...in my opinion...
AS RESEARCH NOW SHOWS... There are two pathways of the mind..one for social cognition or empathic thinking..
and one for mechanical cognition..
Spend time in just one..
and the other withers away..or the path narrows..if one wants to use that analogy....
The old saying USE IT OR LOSE..YES DOES apply ..
and if ya never used..it..
YES DOES APPLY...
I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS..MOSTLY BECAUSE IN MY PRACTICE of empathic/social cognition learning..
i've changed the organization and possibly structure of my mind...
I score an 11 on the AQ test..as opposed to 44 to 45..just 7 months ago...have moved from extreme introvert to extreme extrovert as opposed
to just 7 months ago..and not only that..i am stronger than i ever was before..and stronger at 53 than most of the marines at 21 at my military gym..for my
out of the box TAI CHI..reverse walking..belly dancing walk dance..that yes has made me finally be able to
find my way out of any friggin 'paper bag'..
and hell no..before..i had to watch my wife walk..to even friggin walk at the store..comfortably..i was so uncoordinated before..for sitting my ass in front of a computer..
about 50 percent or more of the time..through the last 5 years of work..and a little over 5 years at home as an almost complete shut-in with those 19 documented medical disorders...
But i had a lot of time for research...
And i found the solutions that work for me..
and yes might work for someone else too..
But here's the thing..like that parable about the camel going through the needle..
I can tell ya from my own experience that a person like me who did score that 44 to 45 on that AQ test..
and did score a 195 on that Aspie quiz and now scores a 92..
had no hands on belief in GOD..experience of belief in general..or even hope ..faith..
or even the ability to smile...remember a laugh or shed a tear...
Just the ability to be able to smile...
IS WORTH ALL THIS FRIGGIN EFFORT..:)
AND WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FULL EMPATHIC SKILLS THAT HUMANS CAN HAVE..
COMES A BURNING DESIRE TO FIND A WAY TO HELP OTHERS FOLKS..WITH SIMILAR DIFFICULTIES IN LIFE..
AS EXPERIENCED..
BUT THAT IS AN EXTREME CHALLENGE IN SOME CASES....
BUT I AM FEARLESS..AND NEVER NEVER NEVER GIVE UP ON ANYTHING I SET OUT TO DO ..
EVEN WHEN I WAS COMPLETELY DISABLED..THAT PART NEVER DIED....
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS
WILL...
GIVEN ALL OTHER POTENTIAL LOSSES..IN LIFE...
IF THAT GOES..AWAY
IT'S ALL OVER..BASICALLY..AS FAR AS I CAN SEE....
AND IF YOU WERE ADDRESSING ME PERSONALLY..my belief in GOD mirrors that of a YOGI..
perhaps more than any other path....
But in my path to developing social cognition..and greater levels of empathy..
that human social practice is a path to understanding what makes other folks tick..
too....
And that is the altruistic part...of life..that an unrepressed totally free human being..
in my opinion..balanced in mind and body..usually experiences in life..most of the time...
The examples of that in history..and NOW ARE TOO MANY TO COUNT..
JESUS IS ONLY A SPECK OF THIS SMALLER THAN A PIECE OF DUST..IN THE HISTORY OF
HUMANKIND..FOR THIS FULL HUMAN EXPERIENCE.. OF LIFE..
BUDDHAHOOD.. HIGH PRIEST..CHRISTHOOD..ZEN MASTER..MARTIAL ARTS MASTER..WHATEVER THE TITLE THAT CULTURE MAY PUT ON IT...
But anyway perhaps this analogy will make it clearer..
ya know how some folks say life's a b***h and then ya die..
Well for a TRULY ENLIGHTENED PERSON..OR THE COMMON ANIMAL EXPERIENCE THAT I INTUIT..MOST ANIMALS EXPERIENCING OUT THERE
IN THE WILD...
LIFE IS BLISS..AND ALL YOU DO IS LIVE NOW....
SERIOUSLY THAT IS HOW I FEEL ALL THE TIME..NOW..
SO WHAT MORE COULD I PERSONALLY ASK FOR IN LIFE..
AND HELL NO IT WAS HELL GETTING TO THIS POINT IN LIFE...
NOTHING WORTH LIVING FOR
IS FREE.
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,784
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
13 Feb 2014, 1:32 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
^^^
Thank you for speaking up on my behalf, sir!
Thank you for speaking up on my behalf, sir!
ALWAYS glad to be of assistance to anyone..your are very welcome...:)
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
13 Feb 2014, 2:10 pm
ruveyn wrote:
Did Jesus exist? Do you mean Jesus the Incarnation of God Himself.
Think about it. Does God the Creator of Heaven and Earth need three meals a day and have take at least one dump daily?
I don't think so.
ruveyn
Think about it. Does God the Creator of Heaven and Earth need three meals a day and have take at least one dump daily?
I don't think so.
ruveyn
Well i'll agree with you..if Jesus was all of GOD..he wouldn't even fit on the earth...:)
or Universe for that 'matter'....
and he if 'he' did poop..
get the hell out of the way...
it would be quite a 'mother'
load.....
common sense .. common sense...
the bible was designed for folks
with
common sense..... to have any chance..
of discerning the beautiful and ugly type poetic..expressions..
just to get a friggin point across....
about how to have a fairly good
life.
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
Last edited by aghogday on 13 Feb 2014, 2:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,784
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
13 Feb 2014, 2:12 pm
ruveyn wrote:
Did Jesus exist? Do you mean Jesus the Incarnation of God Himself.
Think about it. Does God the Creator of Heaven and Earth need three meals a day and have take at least one dump daily?
I don't think so.
ruveyn
Think about it. Does God the Creator of Heaven and Earth need three meals a day and have take at least one dump daily?
I don't think so.
ruveyn
Of course God wouldn't need to. But wanting to is quite a different matter.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
DentArthurDent
Veteran
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia
13 Feb 2014, 6:31 pm
Aghogday, I could untangle the knot of words you present but I am not going to. You are more than capable of writing in a "normal" style which is far easier to read.
_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams
"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx
13 Feb 2014, 7:10 pm
DentArthurDent wrote:
Aghogday, I could untangle the knot of words you present but I am not going to. You are more than capable of writing in a "normal" style which is far easier to read.
No problem .. The first sentence was really all i needed to say to ya...:)
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
13 Feb 2014, 8:45 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Essentially. And if Revelations has any relevancy, it's the history of the 1st century church, but told in the Apocryphal language of Persia, so that the Roman government wouldn't know they were being bad mouthed. But till the separation of the goats from the sheep, it's not the story of times yet to come. You don't seriously think anyone should interpret Revelations as a literal forecast of the future, do you? So yes, you gotta pick and choose what's relevant and what's not.
An interesting write-up on Revelations
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/3 ... evelation/
DentArthurDent
Veteran
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia
14 Feb 2014, 1:21 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
Revelations is not meant to be taken literally, as the language is purposely deceptive, and misinterpretation is rampant among denominations less interested in scholarship. That's how bad doctrines like millennialism came about. As far as interpretation is concerned - what denomination is in total agreement with any other? I admit I was perhaps a bit too flippant concerning what is and isn't acceptable, and the freedom of interpretation. But I stand by the doctrine of gradual revelation - that is, the people of OT times not having a full picture or understanding of what would eventually emerge as Christian theology.
If that's objectionable to you, well, you're more than welcome to your opinion.
So then what is the point of the bible, from what I am getting from yourself and aghogday what is written in the Book is purely subjective. It is not divine, or at least only the bits that an individual wants to accept as divine. The Bible, it seems, is simply a philosophical take on nature and society and should not be taken too seriously as a literal work.
As to the comment on gradual revelation, Jesus was an orthodox Jew. He stated quite clearly that the old laws remain. Are you suggesting that he did not know how his religion should proceed? I would have thought that the fact that large portions of the NT's authorship are forged would give you pause for reflection on the idea of gradual revelation. If Jesus was the son of god then it seems apparent that his message has been manipulated by people with varying agendas, and quite likely bears little resemblance to his original message.
_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams
"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,784
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
14 Feb 2014, 2:14 am
DentArthurDent wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Revelations is not meant to be taken literally, as the language is purposely deceptive, and misinterpretation is rampant among denominations less interested in scholarship. That's how bad doctrines like millennialism came about. As far as interpretation is concerned - what denomination is in total agreement with any other? I admit I was perhaps a bit too flippant concerning what is and isn't acceptable, and the freedom of interpretation. But I stand by the doctrine of gradual revelation - that is, the people of OT times not having a full picture or understanding of what would eventually emerge as Christian theology.
If that's objectionable to you, well, you're more than welcome to your opinion.
So then what is the point of the bible, from what I am getting from yourself and aghogday what is written in the Book is purely subjective. It is not divine, or at least only the bits that an individual wants to accept as divine. The Bible, it seems, is simply a philosophical take on nature and society and should not be taken too seriously as a literal work.
As to the comment on gradual revelation, Jesus was an orthodox Jew. He stated quite clearly that the old laws remain. Are you suggesting that he did not know how his religion should proceed? I would have thought that the fact that large portions of the NT's authorship are forged would give you pause for reflection on the idea of gradual revelation. If Jesus was the son of god then it seems apparent that his message has been manipulated by people with varying agendas, and quite likely bears little resemblance to his original message.
Answers to a couple points you brought up-
It's not that the acceptance of the Bible is entirely subjective, it's just that Revelations is being terribly misinterpreted by evangelicals today. While some parts of the Bible are meant to be taken literally, the literalistic interpretation of everything in the Bible (which fundamentalists do) will only get you very bad theology.
As for Jesus making it clear that the old law was to remain - yes, but he had also said while he had not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. That is, he lived the law perfectly, yet paid the penalty for human disobedience. Thus, he freed us, according to Christian theology, from the condemnation of the law, as Paul explained. And it should also be recalled that Christ had not slavishly believed everything in Hebraic law, but questioned the legitimacy of leaving one's mule in a pit on the Sabbath - or performing any other necessary functions for that matter - and had even taken heat for allowing his disciples to pick grain to eat on the Sabbath. In fact, Christ had told the Pharisees that Moses had allowed for all those countless religious laws because their forefathers were "hard hearted."
A fundamentalist taking every word of the Hebrew law literally, Christ was not.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,784
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
14 Feb 2014, 2:17 am
ArrantPariah wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Essentially. And if Revelations has any relevancy, it's the history of the 1st century church, but told in the Apocryphal language of Persia, so that the Roman government wouldn't know they were being bad mouthed. But till the separation of the goats from the sheep, it's not the story of times yet to come. You don't seriously think anyone should interpret Revelations as a literal forecast of the future, do you? So yes, you gotta pick and choose what's relevant and what's not.
An interesting write-up on Revelations
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/3 ... evelation/
For the most part, the interpretation of Revelations presented in the article is what most mainline Protestant denominations, as well as Roman Catholics, teach today.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
14 Feb 2014, 2:30 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
DentArthurDent wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Revelations is not meant to be taken literally, as the language is purposely deceptive, and misinterpretation is rampant among denominations less interested in scholarship. That's how bad doctrines like millennialism came about. As far as interpretation is concerned - what denomination is in total agreement with any other? I admit I was perhaps a bit too flippant concerning what is and isn't acceptable, and the freedom of interpretation. But I stand by the doctrine of gradual revelation - that is, the people of OT times not having a full picture or understanding of what would eventually emerge as Christian theology.
If that's objectionable to you, well, you're more than welcome to your opinion.
So then what is the point of the bible, from what I am getting from yourself and aghogday what is written in the Book is purely subjective. It is not divine, or at least only the bits that an individual wants to accept as divine. The Bible, it seems, is simply a philosophical take on nature and society and should not be taken too seriously as a literal work.
As to the comment on gradual revelation, Jesus was an orthodox Jew. He stated quite clearly that the old laws remain. Are you suggesting that he did not know how his religion should proceed? I would have thought that the fact that large portions of the NT's authorship are forged would give you pause for reflection on the idea of gradual revelation. If Jesus was the son of god then it seems apparent that his message has been manipulated by people with varying agendas, and quite likely bears little resemblance to his original message.
Answers to a couple points you brought up-
It's not that the acceptance of the Bible is entirely subjective, it's just that Revelations is being terribly misinterpreted by evangelicals today. While some parts of the Bible are meant to be taken literally, the literalistic interpretation of everything in the Bible (which fundamentalists do) will only get you very bad theology.
As for Jesus making it clear that the old law was to remain - yes, but he had also said while he had not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. That is, he lived the law perfectly, yet paid the penalty for human disobedience. Thus, he freed us, according to Christian theology, from the condemnation of the law, as Paul explained. And it should also be recalled that Christ had not slavishly believed everything in Hebraic law, but questioned the legitimacy of leaving one's mule in a pit on the Sabbath - or performing any other necessary functions for that matter - and had even taken heat for allowing his disciples to pick grain to eat on the Sabbath. In fact, Christ had told the Pharisees that Moses had allowed for all those countless religious laws because their forefathers were "hard hearted."
A fundamentalist taking every word of the Hebrew law literally, Christ was not.
yeah...what he said..:)
and
Jesus..
then real man.
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
14 Feb 2014, 2:36 am
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljRKhZ81aqY[/youtube]
_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,784
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
14 Feb 2014, 2:53 am
AspieOtaku wrote:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljRKhZ81aqY[/youtube]
Interesting video... but...
While the words for son and sun are so similar in English, I have to take a stab in the dark and think they probably are not in Hebraic, Greek, or Latin. Using that as a point to prove Christ was just a sun god is a bit poorly thought out.
And as I recall my mythology, Horus hadn't been crucified, but hacked to pieces by Set. His penis in fact went missing. If the video got that fact wrong, I have to wonder about other "facts" presented.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
