I dislike this reasoning. Why? Because of all the people on the other side who say, “Oh, they’re not really atheists, they’re just haters of God/had some horrible event happen/not truly looking/plain lying.” That kind of accusation makes me very annoyed; it’s entirely arrogant and presumptuous. And it is so whichever side of the fence the arguer stands on.
According to the New Testement he wasn’t dead 3 days,just about 36 hours. If you read Matthew 16 verses 27 and 28 you will see that Jesus said he was coming back in his Glory before some of those standing there had died. So since He didn’t, one can assume he was either misquoted, wasn’t telling the truth, or was imagining things. It is a matter of how one wants to translate it or believe. One tends to translate things to their own beliefs rather that what is factual.
Some Christians also teach that Jesus was waiting to return so more could be saved, yet if one considers how many people have not believed over the 2,000 years, far more were lost than the entire population of that time. So waiting 2 or 3 thousand years or more doesn’t mean more are saved.
Monavis
The way you describe your God he is like a father who punishes his 3 moths old baby for not walking or talking because he has legs and a voice.
Monavis
It is strange that you call RCC a denomination when it was the Bishops of the early church that decided what was the word of God and what was not, so in a sense you are following a Book that the early monks copied, The Roman church was united with the Orthodox until the year 1000, it wasn’t until Luther’s time that people started to translate the Bible to suit their own beliefs.
No one can claim to know the truth because the truth was destorted through the years and most people go by what they want the truth to be.
Monavis
Since he chose the torture it wasn’t much, I do not think it was worse than a woman in childbirth or a soldier who suffers his whole life after fighting in a war and being blinded , crippled, and sometimes worse and the ones who die can’t be sure of coming back!. Some times it is harder to live than to die as one can learn from a person who commits suicide, and in a way Jesus death was suicide as he could have stopped it at any time.
Monavis
[quote=“kanicbird, post:167, topic:482923”]
[quote=“Siege, post:164, topic:482923”]
I’m with eleanorrigby. That is an *extremely rude and condescending question. How on earth or in heaven can you have the idea that people in North America or Europe, let alone this message board, haven’t heard of this Jesus fellow and His teachings?
Kanicbird, you do not know Jesus either, only what some one told you about him or you read some other human’s writings . Just be honest and say you believe the person or person that from whom you learned about Jesus.
Monavis
I do know Jesus, the person, on such a level. I’m not talking about His teachings, but His person. It is not some human writing, Jesus is real, is a person that one can know just as one knows a physical person. Such a relationship with God is possible, it is what God wants.
Jesus is not rules, He is a real person that we can know.
So it is a totally fair question, even more so that a self proclaimed (former) christian answered no.
Yeah, and I had tea with King Arthur of Camelot yesterday.
Do you have any evidence your claim is more plausible than mine ?
Just because God used monks does not mean that man can alter His Word. I don’t know why so many people think that God is so incompetent that man can thwart His plans - this is totally illogical IMHO.
It’s because the existence of alternate versions of the Bible clearly shows that humans CAN alter “his word”, assuming he actually existed. There’s nothing magically unalterable about the Bible; it’s just another book.
Jesus did come for Stephan, on a person level
Jesus is a personal God, He works personally with us, why do you assume His return will be on a one time only mass group level?
Kanicbird, do you KNOW RABBI HILLEL? DO YOU? DO YOU?
Cause, I mean, what does Jesus have to do with ultra-religious people?
We could be talking Hasidim.
Is it part of God’s plan that parts of the Bible contradict each other? If God were omnipotent, surely He would be capable of compelling Man to write down His message in a clear and unambiguous way.
Since parts of the Bible are contradictory, one can only assume that either God wants us to discuss what the Bible means, or that He wants us to pick and choose which parts to ignore, or that God does not wish to completely control how we write down His word.
There are no contradictions
It is such absolute truth that we in ourselves need divine help to understand it. Humans are just not capable of directly understanding it.
Since you assume that the Word contradicts itself one can assume that you don’t understand it.
If the Bible doesn’t contradict itself, perhaps you can answer a simple question. What was the last thing Jesus said before dying on the cross? The Gosples of Matthew and Mark say He said, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” [My god, my god, why have you forsaken me?], then gave a loud cry and died (Matthew 27:45-50 and Mark 15:33-37). The Gospel of Luke says He called out, “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit” and breathed his last (Luke 23:46) and the Gospel of John says He said, “It is finished” before breathing His last (John 19:30). Unfortunately, miraculous as He was, I don’t think he could have said all things simultaneously and be understood, especially if the crowd apparently didn’t understand Him that well anyway. If He did say all three things immediately before dying, He puts the heroines of some operas to shame!
As a practicing, practical Christian, my take on this is the Gospels were written for different audiences at different times and have slightly different focuses. Being aware of this in no way diminishes my faith or reduces my joy at Easter. All three versions of Christ’s last words can appeal to me, depending on my mood. However, the logical part of my brain points out to me there are three directly contradictory accounts of Christ’s last words and actions before dying. Your type of Christianity seems to be quite different from mine, so I am curious about how you reconcile these three accounts while claiming the Bible doesn’t contradict itself, assuming you’re using the term “Word” to refer to the Bible.
I’d say this comes pretty close to the Jewish idea.
In fact, a lot of Jews who think the Torah is directly divinely inspired think there’s nothing extraneous in there. If a word is repeated, each repetition must have its own meaning.
Me, I think the Torah is more like a student’s notes from God’s lecture, and therefore not necessarily perfect.
I like that interpretation!
If we know there are religious texts from before Jesus’ time, essentially priming people for his arrival, and we know prophets were a big thing in those days, and we also know that Jesus’ birth did not exactly go by unnoticed, what rational reason can there be for his entire life not being followed by some scribe at the time? Are we supposed to believe that he just led a normal, uninteresting childhood, and then somehow found his calling at the age of 30?
As pointed out above, wrong.
Oh, please. It’s just another error and contradiction filled book of mythology. There’s nothing all that profound about the Bible - it’s not even mostly truthful, much less “absolute truth”. It’s just a collection of myths manufactured by ignorant primitives.
It’s no assumption. There is no “Word”; there’s a bunch of different “Words” that disagree.
Maybe Siege didn’t get that divine help you spoke of.