Christians, what are you talking about?!

[monavis]

@Voyager

I can almost see sacrifices as a test of giving up the best for god. What I never got was sacrificing himself, or being forced to do so.

I have a question for you. Is there any research on whether the Jesus as God’s son idea came from the already common deification of Roman emperors and the belief that people such as Alexander were descended from gods? The idea of Jesus as God’s son makes no sense at all from the standpoint of Jewish tradition, but is hardly shocking from that of Greek and Roman tradition.

The Psalmist is quoted as saying"I say you are gods and sons of the most high’. Since Jesus uses this Psalm when accused of Blasphmey it seems to me that Jesus never thought of himself as being any more God than other people. The word’ God’ itself seems to have evolved in meaning.

[monavis]

@Krokodil

Let me take a whack at this.

In most Christian cosmologies, it was His son, not Himself.

He was murdered.

And all subsequent ones.

I like the cut of your jib, scamartistry; you remind me of that wonderful line in Portnoy’s Complaint about goys having “beliefs that would embarrass a gorilla.” Nevertheless, your question is on the level of one of those “Who’d win in a fight between Jesus and Superman?” discussions.

Christ’s importance wasn’t that He had demigod superpowers or could walk on water and change it into wine, steal your girlfriend and make you look like a punk. He was a radical teacher who intended His example to be followed. Up until His time, one could reasonably think one had found God’s favor by mumbling the right incantations and performing the requisite sacrifices. You want to treat others badly? Cheat your brother out of his birthright for a mess of pottage? Bond one son into slavery to another because he saw you naked? Send your subordinate into battle and then fuck his wife when nobody’s looking? Go ahead, you’re special and chosen and they aren’t.

Jesus introduced this unknown concept: You cannot treat your fellow man badly and still think you have God’s favor. You have to treat them well, even if they’re not of your tribe or religion. Be good to each other and spread the word. (The stuff about miracles, the virgin birth and the Holy Trinity was added later, sometimes a LOT later.)

You want to get incredulous about the Bad Sci-Fi aspects of the Bible? I can’t stop you, but I think you’re missing its true significance.

Scam.. Is correct in one sense,(About the suicide) I was told once that if one can stop someone from killing themself and allows the person to kill him it is suicide. Jesus Hid once, then let them take him willingly, so in a way it was a suicide. He could have stopped the Romans,but didn’t!

[monavis]

@raindog

The texts you’re citing throw a bucket of cold water on the Trinity Doctrine (to whit, anyone reading the Gospels unencumbered with a prior belief in the Trinity will drown in cold water) but do not say what you’re claiming.

In other words, when Jesus says [essentially] says, “look, the use of the word “god” is not restricted to describing the Supreme God Jehovah. In fact, in some contexts even men are described as god”, he’s not also saying “and I’m just like you.”

The bible uses god to describe inanimate objects, men, a belly and other things as “gods.” In every instance where “Jehovah” (YHWH) is concerned, a distinction is made.

It’s quite possible that the Jews talking to him are making the exact same mistake you’re making (and that millions who see him as Capital G God are making). Maybe Jesus is just who he claims to be: not God, but God’s son, born of God through Mary without the benefit a human male donor.

And so sure, Jesus is apparently disavowing that he’s God, something that would be consistent with every word ever attributed to him. But he is definitely not saying “I’m not an extraordinary human being, sent directly by God to redeem mankind from Adamic sin and to whip the House of Israel into shape.”

So God is punishing humans and His own son because he made humans with flaws?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@CitizenPained

How can you believe in Jesus if the entire precept of Christianity is based on ‘what Jews thought in Jesus’ day’ and their projections of Judaism (like the Prophets, for example) is largely a lie?

I don’t believe in Jesus. I’m not a Christian.
A lot of Jewish concepts got distorted by Christianity, starting with the definition of the Messiah. The New Testament is filled with quotes of passages about the Messiah and claims of Messianic prophecy being in the Hebrew Bible that are nothing of the sort when read in context. A lot of Christians are not aware that what they have been taught are prophecies about Jesus and the Messiah in the Hebrew Bible are neither when read in context (or in an un-massaged translation), but typically they defend the disparity by saying that the Hebrew Bible verses have a double meaning, one for Jews and one for Christians (the later only having been able to be understood by the authors of the New Testament writing under divine inspiration). I’ve also heard some Christians say that Jews just interpret heir own Bible wrong and Christians get it right. If you ask them how they can be making the wrong interpretation of books they wrote themselves, they say God wrote them.

If you think all that is ludicrous, I agree, but it’s what they think.

[raindog]

@monavis

So God is punishing humans and His own son because he made humans with flaws?

What flaws would those be?

[Skammer]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

I don’t believe in Jesus. I’m not a Christian.
A lot of Jewish concepts got distorted by Christianity, starting with the definition of the Messiah. The New Testament is filled with quotes of passages about the Messiah and claims of Messianic prophecy being in the Hebrew Bible that are nothing of the sort when read in context [snip] but typically they defend the disparity by saying that the Hebrew Bible verses have a double meaning, one for Jews and one for Christians (the later only having been able to be understood by the authors of the New Testament writing under divine inspiration).

I think that’s a distortion of the actual Christian understanding of those prophecies.

Christians readily acknowledge that most of the OT passages identified as Messianic prophecies were not intended as Messainic prophecy by the authors. I’ve never heard anyone claim, however, that there is one meaning for the Jews and another meaning for the Christians. The original author’s intent is important and perfectly valid. But, on top of that, the passages contain prophecy about the coming Messiah which the authors themselves did not see or intend and could not have been understood until the true Messiah came.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

Google “double fulfillment.”

[Mtgman]

@raindog

What flaws would those be?

Anger, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony, just to name a few.

Enjoy,
Steven

[Farmer_Jane]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

I don’t believe in Jesus. I’m not a Christian.

I know. :o I meant* you* like anyone you.

A lot of Jewish concepts got distorted by Christianity, starting with the definition of the Messiah. The New Testament is filled with quotes of passages about the Messiah and claims of Messianic prophecy being in the Hebrew Bible that are nothing of the sort when read in context.

+1.

A lot of Christians are not aware that what they have been taught are prophecies about Jesus and the Messiah in the Hebrew Bible are neither when read in context (or in an un-massaged translation), but typically they defend the disparity by saying that the Hebrew Bible verses have a double meaning, one for Jews and one for Christians (the later only having been able to be understood by the authors of the New Testament writing under divine inspiration).

Yet it’s a terribly weak argument. What if I said I was divinely inspired to interpret the history of the Americas of three thousand years past? Most religions have some degree of irrationality to them, but that shit’s on a continuum.

I’ve also heard some Christians say that Jews just interpret heir own Bible wrong and Christians get it right.

:smack: Interpretation of law is one thing. Rewriting history or changing the meaning of words is another. If you base your religion on what another religion thinks, your foundation kind of crumbles when it comes to light that you’ve been propagating myth and outright lies about that said religion. If you know so much about the bible to be false and you understand the historical context behind the Christian development of Jesus, how could you ‘believe’ in Jesus?

Why can’t Christianity just stand on its own?

If you ask them how they can be making the wrong interpretation of books they wrote themselves, they say God wrote them.

Since I’m not Christian, I don’t presume to know the meanings of their books any better than they do, since that would make me a sanctimonious a-hole.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Google “double fulfillment.”

Also see this wiki on Bible “typology.”

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Skammer

The original author’s intent is important and perfectly valid. But, on top of that, the passages contain prophecy about the coming Messiah which the authors themselves did not see or intend and could not have been understood until the true Messiah came.

This is what I mean by “double meaning,” and what is called “typology” in Christian theology.

I would say it’s ridiculous to declare that the authors could have written prophecies about Jesus and not known it, but that is indeed what many Christians think.

[Farmer_Jane]

@Skammer

I think that’s a distortion of the actual Christian understanding of those prophecies.

Christians readily acknowledge that most of the OT passages identified as Messianic prophecies were not intended as Messainic prophecy by the authors. I’ve never heard anyone claim, however, that there is one meaning for the Jews and another meaning for the Christians. The original author’s intent is important and perfectly valid. But, on top of that,** the passages contain prophecy about the coming Messiah which the authors themselves did not see or intend and could not have been understood until the true Messiah came.**

The Israelites were pretty nationalistic. If I have a dream or a prophesy (and if you look at Jewish prophesy, it’s mostly basic Pscyh 101 and Soc 101 common sense), someone else has a prophecy, I give birth to a prophet, two generations after me are prophets, and we all have the same message: How can you claim to understand it better than me two thousand years later?

Or put it this way: If I am a Republican and I have a policy on, oh, say, capital gains tax and you disagree with me on that and five major Republican platforms, does that make you a better Republican or just not a Republican?

And if you’re not a Republican, is it because you claim to know the mind of a Republican better than the Republican does?

Of course not. You just have different philosophies.

In order for what you (or they) say to be true, Christians would have to apply the principle of “false prophecy” to Jewish prophets and discredit and disinherit Judaism all together. Since they don’t, it makes their position on ‘Jewish heritage’ pretty wobbly.

You don’t see Jews talking about their pagan heritage and re creating El Al’s (followers) prophesy, do ya? Heck no. What’s paganism have to do with me except I don’t practice it?

Christians claim to know the mind of the Jewish God. That’s awfully presumptuous, but I can see how Christians would need to piggyback on someone else’s religion to strengthen theirs.

Why couldn’t they just say, ‘This is MY god and he is more powerful than yours’ instead of, ‘I know the son of YOUR god [who does not have sons //cough] and YOUR god is actually MY god’?

[Skammer]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Google “double fulfillment.”

Unfortunately this results in a cacophony of eschatological hysteria. If you have a logical issue* with dual fulfillment why don’t you just say what it is?

*Other than the fact that it requires divine inspiration, of course. But I think most Jews would not reject the idea that the prophets were inspired by God.

[Skammer]

@CitizenPained

The Israelites were pretty nationalistic. If I have a dream or a prophesy (and if you look at Jewish prophesy, it’s mostly basic Pscyh 101 and Soc 101 common sense), someone else has a prophecy, I give birth to a prophet, two generations after me are prophets, and we all have the same message: How can you claim to understand it better than me two thousand years later?

Christians claim to understand the prophecies only because they were revealed in Jesus Christ. But this does not detract from the meaning given by the prophets themselves.

Or put it this way: If I am a Republican and I have a policy on, oh, say, capital gains tax and you disagree with me on that and five major Republican platforms, does that make you a better Republican or just not a Republican?

And if you’re not a Republican, is it because you claim to know the mind of a Republican better than the Republican does?

I’m not sure I understand the analogy. I’m not saying the Jewish people were wrong.

In order for what you (or they) say to be true, Christians would have to apply the principle of “false prophecy” to Jewish prophets and discredit and disinherit Judaism all together. Since they don’t, it makes their position on ‘Jewish heritage’ pretty wobbly.

I think you misunderstand. I’m not calling anything “false prophecy” nor trying to discredit the prophets at all; in fact just the opposite.

Christians claim to know the mind of the Jewish God. That’s awfully presumptuous, but I can see how Christians would need to piggyback on someone else’s religion to strengthen theirs.

Jesus was Jewish. His followers were Jewish. Christians believe we worship the same God. The early Christians didn’t “piggyback” on Judaism; it’s all they knew.

Why couldn’t they just say, ‘This is MY god and he is more powerful than yours’ instead of, ‘I know the son of YOUR god [who does not have sons //cough] and YOUR god is actually MY god’?
[/QUOTE]
Jesus was Jewish. His followers were Jewish. Christians believe we worship the same God. The early Christians didn’t “piggyback” on Judaism; it’s all they knew. They weren’t trying to start a new religion or worship a different God.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Skammer

Unfortunately this results in a cacophony of eschatological hysteria. If you have a logical issue* with dual fulfillment why don’t you just say what it is?

*Other than the fact that it requires divine inspiration, of course. But I think most Jews would not reject the idea that the prophets were inspired by God.

I wouldn’t be so sure of that latter claim. Jews tend to take very little theologically for granted and might just argue the opposite of whatever you claim just for the hell of it.

Seriously questioning everything, arguing about everything and considering every angle is a cornerstone of Jewish scriptural study.

Yes, of course, my primary objection to Christian “typological” interpretations of the Hebrew Bible is that it’s a supernatural claim, but it also just strikes me as patently tendentious and reaching.

[Skammer]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

I wouldn’t be so sure of that latter claim. Jews tend to take very little theologically for granted and might just argue the opposite of whatever you claim just for the hell of it.

Yeah, that’s why I couched my claim a bit. I should have just pointed out that most of the prophets, at least, claimed to be speaking for God.

[vivalostwages]

There is a good list of questions posted here:

What's the point?

I’ve wondered about some of those too.

[monavis]

@raindog

What flaws would those be?

All the flaws called sins…like knowing good from evil! Not believing Jesus was God etc. It just means being human and not knowing all that God is supposed to know.