OFFICIAL: Biblical/Theology Discussion thread

[buckeyegrad]

Which is all well and good, but would seem equally applicable to the "something" represented by Mohammed and Islam or the Buddha and Buddhism.

Which is why it is only one part of the equation. It does not "prove" it by itself, it is only lending support.

 

[t_BuckeyeScott]

I can find no reason to doubt Paul's account that Jesus appeared to over 500 witnesses after his death, who testified to his resurrection (1 Cor. 15:5-8). Furthermore, if you look at the Jewish writings regarding the Messiah, Jesus fits all of them, including his claim of divinity and his resurrection. These writing not only include the Old Testament, but the writings of midrash that discuss the two natures of the Messiah (ben Yoseph and ben David). I look at history and millions upon millions of people from an overwhelming diversity of time periods and cultures who have come to accept his resurrection as more than just "majic". There has to be something to the story for it to have this profound of an effect. And finally, the Holy Spirit reveals the truth of the resurrection to me personally on a daily basis.

I should have said this earlier: Amen.

 

[Bleed S & G]

I look at history and millions upon millions of people from an overwhelming diversity of time periods and cultures who have come to accept his resurrection as more than just "majic".

Yes, it makes sense. Everything adds up and it's a very logical conclusion if you believe in the prophets of the OT, this Man was God in the mortal world.

So then, the question for me becomes, is it a coincidence scripture written long before could have been fulfilled to the fullest by this man Jesus Christ?

 

[MightbeaBuck]

Leucippus theorized about atoms in the 5th century BCE.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leucippus/

Along with Leucippus of Miletus (a town now in Turkey), there was Democritus of Abdera. Contemporaries, living in the same time period, both with the same basic idea about tiny, therefore, invisible / indivisible particles making up the world, but working out their ideas separately. As with the Bible, their theories were more philosophical than scientific / experimental in nature.

Little conceptual progress in atomic theory was made over the next two thousand years following this, in large part because Aristotle discredited it, and his views held sway through the Middle Ages.

As far as the Biblical nature of this, and of the early discussion in this thread: Did Leucippus and Democritus do this BEFORE the Biblical mention was written, or AFTER?

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Except you fail the very first test, you're not Jewish.

Sometimes I am Jewish. I say that, and don't mean to offend "actual" jews... but, I've referred to myself as Jewish before.

perhaps the reason is that people are not inherently good. we are all liars and desperately wicked at heart. we just don't like to admit it.

Jonathan Edwards can suck my dick. He's half the reason.... well... maybe 3/4 of the reason I think a lot of Christians are completely fucked in the head.

Wickedness.... I'm calling bullshit. More importantly however, how great is this god of yours that creates man to be inherently not good/wicked?

Would you and many of your buddies die for that cause?

Probably. Well... not sure about my buddies, but David Koresh managed to dig up some nutbags willing to die for his bullshit, so I imagine I could find some equally fucked up people.

Also manage to transport yourself back 2000 years to the exact day Christ entered Jerusalem and take over for him because the timeframe matters too?
Establish bloodline to King David, maybe?

BKB, how much of those prophecies have you actually studied to be sure you get all the details right even if you could?

If I had plans of committing such a fraud, I'd be extremely well versed in the details of what I'd have to SAY I did (regardless of whether I did it or not.. and 2,000 years later, if my story had been continued, you'd believe it just the same)... leading me to:

a better question is which of the numerous specific prophecies would he be able to fake?

seed of a woman?
virgin birth?
preceded by a forerunner?
birth in Bethlehem?
descendant of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David?
from the Tribe of Judah?
heir to the throne of David? (Call me a liar)
time of birth?
slaughter of children?
flight to Egypt?
triumphant entry on a donkey?
entry through the Golden Gate?
betrayal by a friend for 30 pieces of silver? (or the modern day equivalent)
money returned and given to the potter's field?
Judas' position replaced?
soldiers gambling for his clothing?
executed with real criminals?
pierced hands and feet?
agonized in thirst?
given gall and vinegar?
no bones broken?
side pierced?
forsaken by God?
buried with rich?
abandoned by followers?
time of death?
resurrection?
others resurrected?

all of those things were prophesied in the Old Testament. all fulfilled by Jesus Christ.

Big fucking deal. If I told you I was born of a virgin, who are YOU to say I'm lying?

Some things that fit my life are in bold in your quoted post above.... I could fake the rest, and hell... since i haven't died yet, it's hard for me to say much about who I'll be buried with or if I'll rise from the dead. But, I'm pretty sure I could do those things... or at least pay someone enough to SAY I did those things....

Point is, I could make all this stuff up and get a number of strung out hippies to consider me Christ and go about telling folks how great I am. The only thing that makes me less impressive than say the Pope, on matters religion, is FAR less people believe what I have to say. That's not an issue of truth, however, that's an issue of power and/or tradition (at this point in time).

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

We definitely disagree here. I have always contended that God is beyond infinite, which is to say He is beyond everything. Rather than simply being everything we see, feel, hear, touch, know, don't know; He is the creator of them. They being a creation of His means He is not infinite, rather He is beyond it since He created the infinite.

I must not have articulated myself well, as I agree that God is "infinity +1" if you will. So, we definitely do not disagree here.

Edit: Looking back a few pages (1 page?) I saw you say something about "good is what is God's will" I would say, there is NOTHING BUT GOD'S WILL. Even should God WILL dissent, it is STILL his will. Even if there was a place were God could be absent (and thereby "evil") God WILLED such a place, and it is therefore "good." Therefore also, by the way, "Evil" (if there is such a thing) is ALSO God's will. So, I say there is no such thing as evil. There is no such thing as wicked. These are man's concepts used to describe man. And its part of the reason I do not buy the words of the Bible hook, line and sinker. I suppose, said differently, if God is the confused, jealous, indecisive, mistake prone god of the Bible, I prefer my infinite God and choose to worship it, rather than live in fear of the wrath of this god who appears to get set off over some rather odd stuff, and yet seems not to mind things like 9/11, Pearl Harbor, the Holocaust... and so on. Maybe this is where Thump comes from with the questions he asks... who is this God who destroys Sodom and Gommorah for loose women and boozin, but doesn't step up to the plate against Terrorists or Nazis or white slave owners. I just don't think God cares to get involved, because he willed it all to be, and it is Good (regardless of how we think about it) Death by terrorism... by nazi.. by slave master... these are meaningless events.. there is no such thing as death. Without "death" the "ultimate threat" evil possesses disappears, and there is no fear.

How can you believe in a God who is more than infinite but yet somehow not in complete and total (infinite) control? I mean, really.. what is a battle of "good and evil" if God is indeed all powerful. It's ridiculous. Why should I worry the least about evil, when I KNOW God shall prevail?

Incidentally, on my issue I called myself on last page, I've for the moment taken the "cop out" answer - "I'm merely a man, and thus cannot comprehend the full depths of how I could distrust Man, if Man is also to be considered a part of God.

The problem I backed myself in to is that I called God everything, which includes people themselves.... That takes away someone's individuality... mine... yours.. or God's. I suppose I'm leaning towards the actual answer being "there's no difference in any of these things" which of course makes my "distrust" worthless.... which, of course, it is.... I suppose. Basically, it's a paradox... I believe contradicting things.... but as I mentioned in my question above re: paradoxes being answers and little more, and the fact that I believe P = not P is a true statement (I know that sounds absurd, there's obviously more to it that simply the conclusion I've set forth here), I guess I'm happy with the result. Indeed, a paradox is simply an engine, keeping a dynamic reality dynamic.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I suppose I should elaborate a little bit on what I mean by saying I don't believe in the god of the Bible (no caps intentional).....

As should be no secret, I believe there is some metaphysical truth in the Bible, but that I do not consider myself anything approaching a literalist. The way I see it is like this.... a great deal of the Bible - stories like Sodom and Gommorah - aren't about God at all, they are about man telling man what is and what is not going to be acceptable. It's about government. It's law... hell, it even SAYS it's law... Law is population control - behavior - consequence. So, early "governors" (people like Hammurabi) say by story, if you're committing these acts, whoring around, etc. God will smite you, so you best not do it. Well, God's not REALLY going to smite you, but the fear that he MIGHT keeps you from doing whatever act.

I mean, why would the church (read Catholic Church) take such efforts to ensure people stayed "stupid?" So the fear of the unknown remained, and the "law" in the Bible still had force. But, a lot of people today don't expect God to start throwing fire and brimstone down from the sky if they steal their neighbors dog, or whatever... and so the Biblical law "Thou shalt not steal" is no particular deterrent to these people. A few months in prison may be (although, it may also may not be, considering the crime rate). But, fact is, as I said, God doesn't act dramatically in the world... least not like the "old days" when you could trust him to get pissed off about something and send a flood or turn people to salt or something.

So, the "god" the Bible talks about who does these things... he's not God at all... he's man trying to govern (control) other man.

George Carlin joked that the 10 commandments are really just 2 commandments...
1. Be kind to eachother and
2. Keep your hands off of other people's stuff.
And really, that's just 1 commandment.... be kind (in that taking other people's stuff is unkind).. well, there's some truth to this joke. I would accept that the message from God - and the guy called Jesus (who may or may not have been the Christ) - is "be good to each other." That seems sensible for an All Loving God to command... I guess. But this business about not touching menstruating woman or face being thrown in a river.... that's nothing more than man trying to keep other man under control. God could care less about this petty crap. In my view he just wants us to live, to love living, and to "die" having learned lessons.

 

[daddyphatsacs]

But this business about not touching menstruating woman or face being thrown in a river.... that's nothing more than man trying to keep other man under control. God could care less about this petty crap. In my view he just wants us to live, to love living, and to "die" having learned lessons.

I'm not very hip on religious chit chat, but that statement hits the nail on the head from where I stand. God is everywhere, and is within all of us. Will he strike us down for not going to confession? I doubt it...... I just think that he wants us all to be good people, and treat others with dignity and respect. If we do so, the rest of it will fall in place.

 

[PrincetonBuckeye]

I just think that he wants us all to be good people, and treat others with dignity and respect.

Does that leave Tibs out the question then?? :tongue2:

 

[jwinslow]

I mean, why would the church (read Catholic Church) take such efforts to ensure people stayed "stupid?"

I can't remember the passage, but Paul chastised those who did not test all teachings against what they believed. There are many unbiblical things that the Catholic church did...

I'm not very hip on religious chit chat, but that statement hits the nail on the head from where I stand. God is everywhere, and is within all of us. Will he strike us down for not going to confession? I doubt it......

(in terms of The Bible) You can't earn your way to heaven, so you are correct.

I just think that he wants us all to be good people, and treat others with dignity and respect. If we do so, the rest of it will fall in place.

What exactly is the definition of good? If we get to figure it out, then can't every person redefine good to the point where their actions are justified?

 

[t_BuckeyeScott]

Sometimes I am Jewish. I say that, and don't mean to offend "actual" jews... but, I've referred to myself as Jewish before.


Jonathan Edwards can suck my dick. He's half the reason.... well... maybe 3/4 of the reason I think a lot of Christians are completely fucked in the head.

Wickedness.... I'm calling bullshit. More importantly however, how great is this god of yours that creates man to be inherently not good/wicked?



Probably. Well... not sure about my buddies, but David Koresh managed to dig up some nutbags willing to die for his bullshit, so I imagine I could find some equally fucked up people.

If I had plans of committing such a fraud, I'd be extremely well versed in the details of what I'd have to SAY I did (regardless of whether I did it or not.. and 2,000 years later, if my story had been continued, you'd believe it just the same)... leading me to:



Big fucking deal. If I told you I was born of a virgin, who are YOU to say I'm lying?

Some things that fit my life are in bold in your quoted post above.... I could fake the rest, and hell... since i haven't died yet, it's hard for me to say much about who I'll be buried with or if I'll rise from the dead. But, I'm pretty sure I could do those things... or at least pay someone enough to SAY I did those things....

Point is, I could make all this stuff up and get a number of strung out hippies to consider me Christ and go about telling folks how great I am. The only thing that makes me less impressive than say the Pope, on matters religion, is FAR less people believe what I have to say. That's not an issue of truth, however, that's an issue of power and/or tradition (at this point in time).

One of the things you clearly don't understand. The lineage to David I would call you a liar unless you could manage to name every person in your bloodline back to David which is what Mattew does for Jesus in Matt 1. You see the Jews kept meticulous family tree records because their land was divided accorded to your family. It was important for them to know their bloodlines. You could claim it but we would call you a liar. Whereas in Jesus's time they had established his lineage. We're talking provable claims here. You couldn't prove your lineage.

 

[WyoBuck]

The idea of God is a struggle for survival. If the notion of an omnipotent , omnipresent God is to be believed, then there are a couple of facts that must be accepted.

First, if a god is omnipotent, then it is certainly self-aware. Simply meaning, that if there is a consciousness that identifies itself as a god, "It" is also aware that "It" exists. Secondly, a god would have to be aware that there is a balance to everything and that in order to exist, there would have to be something that didn't exist. It would have to realize that if it were to be omnipotent, to be everything, that it would also have to be nothing. So, if God is everything, then God is a paradox.

Slowing down, God has to have identified Itself as a paradox, thereby qualifying it as "something" in order to maintain It's assertion of existence. Does anyone else have a problem with this? Me too. How can anything be everything and nothing at the same time? That is the mystery of God. It must be hard work. It is good and evil, real and imaginary, it is every thought that every creature on every planet in every galaxy in every universe ever had, it is all of the thoughts that none of those creatures ever had as well, and still, it is none of the thoughts that any of those creatures ever had too. That is the key though, that in order to exist, you have to have either a physical manifestation, an avatar, if you will, and you need to have a second party to confirm your existence, or else in the current scenario, there is no cognoscente existence of God. We are one. Christ was the other.

As mundane as it may sound, we are the reason that God exists at all, and God is the reason that we all exist. We both require one another to confirm our existence. To be sure, the more powerful God would have dictated that there were subsequent existences, not like our own, that should have existed, and will exist, in our stead, and It probably has, but on this planet, in this galaxy, in this universe, On this plane of existence, this is what It got, for now.

Now that God has established that It is omnipotent, and that It exists, It can ascertain any rules and regulations It wants, because It has figured out the riddle, except that if It creates another cognoscente entity to confirm its existence, that separate entity must have the free will to credit or discredit the existence of God or anything else. If a tree falls in the woods, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?


Only, if there is someone else around to hear it.


Chances are, there are as many "Christs" as there are cognoscente groups of creatures in the whole realm of existence. However, Christians, don't be angry. Since God IS, in fact, omnipotent, It CAN, create what we believe to be heaven and hell, the rules which we must follow to qualify for entry into whichever aforementioned domain you belong in and validate anything that you want to believe, as long as you are glorifying It, BUT in order to maintain the standard of free will, we must be allowed to choose NOT to do those things, thereby defying the word of God and becoming Sinners. Must keep the balance. If there were ONLY good, then God wouldn't be necessary, nor would we. More simply, IF there were only ONE choice, then there really wouldn't be a choice, would there?

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

One of the things you clearly don't understand. The lineage to David I would call you a liar unless you could manage to name every person in your bloodline back to David which is what Mattew does for Jesus in Matt 1. You see the Jews kept meticulous family tree records because their land was divided accorded to your family. It was important for them to know their bloodlines. You could claim it but we would call you a liar. Whereas in Jesus's time they had established his lineage. We're talking provable claims here. You couldn't prove your lineage.

Where are these detailed records you speak of (as if you were there having a look at them with your own eyes). I suppose they were just thrown away once Matty went thru the trouble of figuring out where Jesus comes from. Care to explain how these "detailed records" used provided Luke with a different genealogy than Matthew.
Likewise, if God is Jesus' father, then why do we trace Jesus' bloodline through JOSEPH and not Mary? 'Splain me that, oh ye of the infinite understanding. If Joseph's bloodline is to David, seems to me that Jesus is more properly the "Step-Son-of-Man"
Here is a nice link of differences between Luke and Matt. I suppose we have to CHOOSE to believe one or the other bloodline... failing the existence of these detailed records Scott speaks of which apparently weren't detailed enough to establish even who Jesus' Grandfather was. ("Heli" in Luke 3:23 or "Jacob" in Matt. 3:16)
You guys crack me up.

What you clearly dont understand is that my family has also kept detailed family records. And you assume I can't prove my lineage. You see, the BKB family tree is important because I'm the fucking King of Man. In all seriousness, you cannot prove I am not a descendant of David. You choose to believe I am lying. Nothing more, nothing less. Fortunately for me, the task of outlining my family tree here in cyberspace is something I can decline to do, and do so decline.

Once again... I claim I am descendant of David. You may either choose to accept that I am telling the truth and the consequences of my bloodline, or you may choose to call me a liar. But, in either case, you have done nothing more than accept or reject a tale.... and that's all you're doing with Christianity and the Bible as well.

 

[sandgk]

Incoming!!!

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

The idea of God is a struggle for survival. If the notion of an omnipotent , omnipresent God is to be believed, then there are a couple of facts that must be accepted.

First, if a god is omnipotent, then it is certainly self-aware. Simply meaning, that if there is a consciousness that identifies itself as a god, "It" is also aware that "It" exists. Secondly, a god would have to be aware that there is a balance to everything and that in order to exist, there would have to be something that didn't exist. It would have to realize that if it were to be omnipotent, to be everything, that it would also have to be nothing. So, if God is everything, then God is a paradox.

Slowing down, God has to have identified Itself as a paradox, thereby qualifying it as "something" in order to maintain It's assertion of existence. Does anyone else have a problem with this? Me too. How can anything be everything and nothing at the same time?

Yep. That's my conclusion. God is indeed a paradox (as I said, Infinity +1... or Bgrad's "Beyond infinity") I have no problem with it. First, the conclusion is nothing but a logical paradox which may or may not be a "real" paradox (that is, one with real world consequences). That is to say, reality need no conform to whatever mistakes we may be making as thinkers. And, assuming we're making no mistake, reality need not conform to our understanding of the problem (that is to say, maybe God isn't omnipotent... This construct (the omnipotent God) is a philosophical construct, and not necessarily "true" with regard to God itself.)

Second, and more to the point that I've been hinting at... I don't see the big deal in a paradox. Now, don't get me wrong.... I know it's supposed to be a bad thing for an argument to end in a paradox... but, it doesn't have to be That way. I once heard that there is a line a math that states that parallel lines cross at infinity. (I'm terrible with math, so this conclusion seemed to me to be a fine working construct to think about, even if it's by definition impossible) So, if such math is "true" P and not P can be at the same time... Or, God is both everything and nothing. When I think about it, and its as my friend once called "trying to pin God down to a number line," I imagine a line from -Infinity to +infinity, and when you reach either place (neg or pos. inf. you find you're in the same place.... it's not a line at all, its a circle. Which in my mind, allows for a single dimension to "give birth" to a second dimension... affording the birth of more dimensions....)

But, frankly, my inability to do even the simplest of math makes all my conjecture on things mathematical little more than rubbish. But, joyfully, it affords me a great deal of freedom in thought.