Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Is it possible that we may know more about Jesus and God's word (the Bible) if we look further into it? Could if be possible that the Bible may have something beyond the text that would have GOD's signature to ensure that He influenced it's writtings?
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Can prophesy be a distinguishment between the Divine and non-divine?
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Jester;770557 wrote: No, he was tried illegally, and his offense was that he was the king of the jews, they crucifed Jesus because he was the son of God and they rejected him.
They set up false witnesses, and pilate declared him innocent yet allowed the jews of the day to kill him under thier traditions.
Jesus did nothing worthy of death.
They killed him because he was too successful - he gained too many supporters and detracted from their position.
The reaction of the insecure to a threat is always to hit out.
They set up false witnesses, and pilate declared him innocent yet allowed the jews of the day to kill him under thier traditions.
Jesus did nothing worthy of death.
They killed him because he was too successful - he gained too many supporters and detracted from their position.
The reaction of the insecure to a threat is always to hit out.
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
rjwould;771098 wrote: The more I read others opinions on Jesus, the more possibilities open up to me.
I will never again believe in the miracles associated with him in the Bible, but I can certainly understand someone is responsible for this religion. After reading yaaarrrgg's version of what may have happened, which was interesting to me, I am beginning to think the crucifixion was a hoax, and Jesus was not killed, but instead, lived to continue to build his movement.
So, of course if there was no crucifixion, there would be no resurrection..
Why wouldn't you believe any of the miracles associated with the Bible?
I will never again believe in the miracles associated with him in the Bible, but I can certainly understand someone is responsible for this religion. After reading yaaarrrgg's version of what may have happened, which was interesting to me, I am beginning to think the crucifixion was a hoax, and Jesus was not killed, but instead, lived to continue to build his movement.
So, of course if there was no crucifixion, there would be no resurrection..
Why wouldn't you believe any of the miracles associated with the Bible?
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
rjwould;771534 wrote: Because they are simply not believable to me. No insult intended..
None taken
Do you think the Bible could be Divinely inspired?
None taken
Do you think the Bible could be Divinely inspired?Jesus the man, death and resurrection
rjwould;771589 wrote: No! I no longer believe in a "living" God..
May I ask why?
May I ask why?
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
:wah: Why?
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
What do you call it when a senior citizen takes viagra? A res-erection.
Sorry ... that just popped into my head. :wah:
Sorry ... that just popped into my head. :wah:
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
rjwould;771632 wrote: This is your first time, isn't it?
It takes a little practice but it can be lots of fun if you can put aside your inhibitions. Just relax and let it flow---be creative..
I have found that serious subjects is not the way to go unless you are willing to be real absurd about it...you have to be comedic.
This method is futile, but you'll figure that out soon enough......Good Luck....Have fun!
Oh, and to answer your question.....Because....
I hear you! Just interested in your point of view
It takes a little practice but it can be lots of fun if you can put aside your inhibitions. Just relax and let it flow---be creative..
I have found that serious subjects is not the way to go unless you are willing to be real absurd about it...you have to be comedic.
This method is futile, but you'll figure that out soon enough......Good Luck....Have fun!
Oh, and to answer your question.....Because....
I hear you! Just interested in your point of view
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
Your response in #50 is a nice story but hardly historically accurate. It is the theology that was added to the experience of Jesus of Nazareth.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Your response in #50 is a nice story but hardly historically accurate. It is the theology that was added to the experience of Jesus of Nazareth.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Just a comment on both Jesus existence and death. This has been debated for centuries. There are several well respected historians who have no problem whatsoever with the fact that Jesus was real human being. There is no doubt in their minds that he was crucified.
To respond the the suggestion that he wasn't crucified and went on to build up his group of followers: The disciples were indeed terrified for their very lives and disappeared from society for a short time. Whatever the Easter event was it was so profound that these men changed from being fearful for their lives to out and out preaching with no fear. Not only that but this man has had a profound influence on history for the past 2000 years.
Since history, itself, is a very inexact science they could be wrong but at this point in time the do not believe they are. Here we are some 63 years from the holocaust and there are those trying to rewrite history denying the event took place; Zundel.
When it comes to calling Jesus the "Son of God" etc. these are theological concepts which can only be explained in metaphor since our language is not capable of such descriptions of definitions.
The history is one thing and the theology is a separate issue.
Shalom
Ted:-6
To respond the the suggestion that he wasn't crucified and went on to build up his group of followers: The disciples were indeed terrified for their very lives and disappeared from society for a short time. Whatever the Easter event was it was so profound that these men changed from being fearful for their lives to out and out preaching with no fear. Not only that but this man has had a profound influence on history for the past 2000 years.
Since history, itself, is a very inexact science they could be wrong but at this point in time the do not believe they are. Here we are some 63 years from the holocaust and there are those trying to rewrite history denying the event took place; Zundel.
When it comes to calling Jesus the "Son of God" etc. these are theological concepts which can only be explained in metaphor since our language is not capable of such descriptions of definitions.
The history is one thing and the theology is a separate issue.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
I trust in God I don't need the book. It is God through the Holy Spirit who leads. It is not the book.
But if one needs the book then so be it.
If anyone wants to believe it is historically accurate then go for. I and many others do not. I am not called by God to park my brain at the church door. I am called by God to use my brain in His service and that is what I do.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I trust in God I don't need the book. It is God through the Holy Spirit who leads. It is not the book.
But if one needs the book then so be it.
If anyone wants to believe it is historically accurate then go for. I and many others do not. I am not called by God to park my brain at the church door. I am called by God to use my brain in His service and that is what I do.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
Yep. But I do think it is important that others see both sides of the story.
BTW I am quite relaxed.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Yep. But I do think it is important that others see both sides of the story.
BTW I am quite relaxed.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Ted;771803 wrote: Just a comment on both Jesus existence and death. This has been debated for centuries. There are several well respected historians who have no problem whatsoever with the fact that Jesus was real human being. There is no doubt in their minds that he was crucified.
To respond the the suggestion that he wasn't crucified and went on to build up his group of followers: The disciples were indeed terrified for their very lives and disappeared from society for a short time. Whatever the Easter event was it was so profound that these men changed from being fearful for their lives to out and out preaching with no fear. Not only that but this man has had a profound influence on history for the past 2000 years.
...
Shalom
Ted:-6
But in my scenario, I allow that someone that looked like Jesus was crucified ...
My methodology is to reduce the recorded events to raw observations, and strip out the first century interpretation gluing the story line together.
For example, instead of saying "Jesus was killed" ... no one could possibly know that without dental records and fingerprinting. Even in modern times, the issue of knowledge is not clear cut ... there's always a level of assumption. The most a person at that time would observe is ... "someone that looks like Jesus was killed" .. and make the inferencial leap.
Then I reject the inferential leaps. I view most people in the first century as too willing to jump to superstitious explanations for everything ranging from the motion of the sun to odd observations that defied initial cognitive grasp. Surely, if they saw someone that was suppose to be dead, they would jump immediately to a supernatural explanation ... and believe that they were a ghost of sorts.
What I end up with is at best, the series of events was a hoax of sorts, or never happened at all (perhaps the stories are alluding to older myths). Although I dont think it would be hard to fool the authorities -- especially in ancient times -- when hoaxes of greater magnitude are carried out in modern times.
ETA: Also, I don't think it that unlikely that someone would die to protect a religious belief .. even in modern times this is not uncommon in the middle east. So it's not really much of a stretch to suppose someone laid down their life to protect a leader like Jesus. To die in his place ...
If then, others believed that Jesus had really beaten death, it would have had a profound psychological effect on them, and they would not fear it. That would explain the change you note.
To respond the the suggestion that he wasn't crucified and went on to build up his group of followers: The disciples were indeed terrified for their very lives and disappeared from society for a short time. Whatever the Easter event was it was so profound that these men changed from being fearful for their lives to out and out preaching with no fear. Not only that but this man has had a profound influence on history for the past 2000 years.
...
Shalom
Ted:-6
But in my scenario, I allow that someone that looked like Jesus was crucified ...
My methodology is to reduce the recorded events to raw observations, and strip out the first century interpretation gluing the story line together.
For example, instead of saying "Jesus was killed" ... no one could possibly know that without dental records and fingerprinting. Even in modern times, the issue of knowledge is not clear cut ... there's always a level of assumption. The most a person at that time would observe is ... "someone that looks like Jesus was killed" .. and make the inferencial leap.
Then I reject the inferential leaps. I view most people in the first century as too willing to jump to superstitious explanations for everything ranging from the motion of the sun to odd observations that defied initial cognitive grasp. Surely, if they saw someone that was suppose to be dead, they would jump immediately to a supernatural explanation ... and believe that they were a ghost of sorts.
What I end up with is at best, the series of events was a hoax of sorts, or never happened at all (perhaps the stories are alluding to older myths). Although I dont think it would be hard to fool the authorities -- especially in ancient times -- when hoaxes of greater magnitude are carried out in modern times.
ETA: Also, I don't think it that unlikely that someone would die to protect a religious belief .. even in modern times this is not uncommon in the middle east. So it's not really much of a stretch to suppose someone laid down their life to protect a leader like Jesus. To die in his place ...
If then, others believed that Jesus had really beaten death, it would have had a profound psychological effect on them, and they would not fear it. That would explain the change you note.
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Jester;772852 wrote: But you are leaving out the throngs of honest ones who really want to believe and doubt, then are convinced that it is the truth, what happened when the doubter, who believes, discovers the hoax? As it would most definietly get out at the time... the ones who honestly belived and were disillusioned would announce from the rooftops the hoax and uncover it by very angry, means.
Where are they?
Well, that's a good point. It's certainly possible that events didn't happen as I described ... there's a lot of other possible scenarios, each with loose ends. I suppose it's really a choice in terms of what unlikely events we see as more probable ... when we interpret these stories.
One thing I had been considering, is if the character Judas even existed. I keep coming back the the case that perhaps Judas was really Jesus (in disguise).. leaving only two men who knew the full story of the death and resurrection. And one of which was crucified. Judas is such a minor character, he's hardly even mentioned as a disciple under he's introduced as a betrayer. My first impression reading the story when I was a kid was "Who's this guy kissing Jesus???" Out of the blue there he is ... I'd expected him to be fleshed out more as a minor character.
Of course, maybe the word "hoax" isn't the best word to describe these events. If someone laid down his life for Jesus, maybe Jesus wanted to express that feeling of love to others, symbolically saying "the man that died" laid down his life for them ... so that they would understand. Also, It's not necessarily the case that Jesus was lying or intentionally trying to fool people. Speaking metaphorically it would be easy for a listener to interpret this as the modern story of Christianity. Maybe if Jesus saw this was giving people hope, he didn't bother correcting the impression.
Where are they?
Well, that's a good point. It's certainly possible that events didn't happen as I described ... there's a lot of other possible scenarios, each with loose ends. I suppose it's really a choice in terms of what unlikely events we see as more probable ... when we interpret these stories.
One thing I had been considering, is if the character Judas even existed. I keep coming back the the case that perhaps Judas was really Jesus (in disguise).. leaving only two men who knew the full story of the death and resurrection. And one of which was crucified. Judas is such a minor character, he's hardly even mentioned as a disciple under he's introduced as a betrayer. My first impression reading the story when I was a kid was "Who's this guy kissing Jesus???" Out of the blue there he is ... I'd expected him to be fleshed out more as a minor character.
Of course, maybe the word "hoax" isn't the best word to describe these events. If someone laid down his life for Jesus, maybe Jesus wanted to express that feeling of love to others, symbolically saying "the man that died" laid down his life for them ... so that they would understand. Also, It's not necessarily the case that Jesus was lying or intentionally trying to fool people. Speaking metaphorically it would be easy for a listener to interpret this as the modern story of Christianity. Maybe if Jesus saw this was giving people hope, he didn't bother correcting the impression.
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
yarg:-6
The best I can do for you is to suggest that you read the works of some of the world's renound historians of ancient times. These men are recognized around the world as competent historians; J. D. Crossan, Marcus Borg, Karen Armstrong, S. McFague, Hans Kung, E. Ehrman, T. Wright and a host of others whom I could name if you like.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The best I can do for you is to suggest that you read the works of some of the world's renound historians of ancient times. These men are recognized around the world as competent historians; J. D. Crossan, Marcus Borg, Karen Armstrong, S. McFague, Hans Kung, E. Ehrman, T. Wright and a host of others whom I could name if you like.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
Once again you misrepresent my position.
Besides that you talk as if I was alone but I could list hundreds if not thousands who think the same.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Once again you misrepresent my position.
Besides that you talk as if I was alone but I could list hundreds if not thousands who think the same.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
JAB:-6
I would agree with that 100%. The only reason I brought that up was to counter the implication coming from jester that I'm basically alone. He seems to have a problem understanding that there are other valid points of view in this world.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I would agree with that 100%. The only reason I brought that up was to counter the implication coming from jester that I'm basically alone. He seems to have a problem understanding that there are other valid points of view in this world.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Since this is my thread I'm going to place this in here. I was reading today and came across a beautiful prayer. It just rang an interesting chord with me.
"O God! If I worship Thee in fear of Hell, burn me in Hell; and if I worship Thee in hope of Paradise, exclude me from Paradise; but if I worship Thee for Thine own sake, withhold not Thine Everlasting Beauty!"
Shalom
Ted:-6
"O God! If I worship Thee in fear of Hell, burn me in Hell; and if I worship Thee in hope of Paradise, exclude me from Paradise; but if I worship Thee for Thine own sake, withhold not Thine Everlasting Beauty!"
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
JAB:-6
If that is your interpretation that is fine with me. It is not the reason I brought it up. Usually when I quote from a book or take an idea from another person I do the honourable thing of crediting that person with it. To do otherwise is called plagiarism.
Others are quite free to do the same and in fact I would hope they do.
Shalom
Ted :-6
If that is your interpretation that is fine with me. It is not the reason I brought it up. Usually when I quote from a book or take an idea from another person I do the honourable thing of crediting that person with it. To do otherwise is called plagiarism.
Others are quite free to do the same and in fact I would hope they do.
Shalom
Ted :-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
JAB:-6
My list above was for the benefit of yarg and no one else.
Shalom
Ted:-6
My list above was for the benefit of yarg and no one else.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Ted;773036 wrote: yarg:-6
The best I can do for you is to suggest that you read the works of some of the world's renound historians of ancient times. These men are recognized around the world as competent historians; J. D. Crossan, Marcus Borg, Karen Armstrong, S. McFague, Hans Kung, E. Ehrman, T. Wright and a host of others whom I could name if you like.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Thank you for the suggestions ... I will try to check them out.
It's probably unlikely the events really happened as I suggested (if they happened at all) ... I'm just speculating.
The best I can do for you is to suggest that you read the works of some of the world's renound historians of ancient times. These men are recognized around the world as competent historians; J. D. Crossan, Marcus Borg, Karen Armstrong, S. McFague, Hans Kung, E. Ehrman, T. Wright and a host of others whom I could name if you like.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Thank you for the suggestions ... I will try to check them out.
It's probably unlikely the events really happened as I suggested (if they happened at all) ... I'm just speculating.
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
Now you are telling me that it is ok for you to present your opinion but you get angry when I present mine.
Perhaps it is you who are misrepresenting scripture. After all you have clearly said it is your opinion.
I have never claimed to have all the right answers. In fact I well know I do not. Anyone who makes such a claim is living in a delusion.
By all means keep posting. I will continue to put in another opinion when I feel it is called for.
You will also probably keep misrepresenting what I say. So life goes on.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Now you are telling me that it is ok for you to present your opinion but you get angry when I present mine.
Perhaps it is you who are misrepresenting scripture. After all you have clearly said it is your opinion.
I have never claimed to have all the right answers. In fact I well know I do not. Anyone who makes such a claim is living in a delusion.
By all means keep posting. I will continue to put in another opinion when I feel it is called for.
You will also probably keep misrepresenting what I say. So life goes on.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
Relax bud.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Relax bud.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
What I see is someone trying to proselytize on the forum. I have no problem with that but you can expect disagreements.
Secondly I see someone who seems to think they have all the right answers. It is somewhat self deluding to say the least if that is what you think.
I've never said your interpretation is wrong. I have always pointed out alternative interpretations. Since I openly admit I do not have all the answers I would never say that to anyone.
I accept full responsibility for what I post and say. I have complete trust in God.
You have tried to strive with me. jester, you don't get it. I've been where you are and I found it seriously deficient. Many others are of the same mind.
I don't believe Jesus was God. You really haven't made any effort to understand what I've been saying. Jesus was a very special man who enjoyed a very special and unique association with God. We see manifest in one Jesus of Nazareth the Nature of God as best as a human can show it and as best as a human can understand it. When you go any further you are demeaning God by trying to bring Him down to your level. I do not believe that we can grasp God in any real way. We can see and feel his activity in the world but we cannot understand the real essence of God. The best we can do is use metaphor. I am a Trinitarian. I accept the life death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. Do I understand it? Absolutely not and neither does anyone else. It is beyond our grasp as humans. At best what we can say is only metaphor because the greatness of God is beyond anything we can grasp.
Do I believe in the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus? That is one of many interpretations of his death. There are others. One thing for certain is that his death clearly showed us the unconditional love of God.
I don't say how. Do you need to be told what is injustice and what is justice? Do you need to be told what is unkindness and kindness. My heavens these things are written in your heart. You want a clear answer. If you see injustice being done anywhere you are obligated as a Christian to try to correct it. If you see unkindness and suffering anywhere you are obligated to do something about it. All of humanity are children of God. All of life including animals are sacred.
As far as salvation goes I leave that up to God. That is his purview. It is most certainly not mine or yours. How can you be sure? It is called "trust in God". When someone says to me they need the book and the history it does say something about their trust in God. Try reading the prayer I posted above. It has a good lesson worthy of note.
I don't believe evil exists??? That is a laugh. I most certainly do believe there is a power of evil in the world.
Which Bible do I read? I have many in my library. I make use of the Hebrew OT., the Greek NT., and the NRSV which is the one most recognized by those dreadful people we call scholars. It was the scholars who gave us the Bible in the first place.
If you are here to proselytize then I am not your person. I have been your way and found it deficient. If you are here to discuss and debate without guile then I am a willing participant. It makes little difference to me if you agree or disagree.
You have found my position lacking. Personally I don't care. It is no wonder since you have made no effort whatsoever to understand it. To put it concisely Christianity is a way of life. It is not about correct belief. It is a relational religion in which our relationship with God and our fellow man counts. It is a life devoted to the path that Jesus walked. A path of justice, kindness, transformation, living in a developing, transformational relationship with the Divine. It is not about "getting it right". If that were the case then no one would get it right. It is about "Trusting in God" and following in the footsteps of the Messiah. In fact those are the tenets of the basis of all of the world's great faiths.
TRUST IN GOD
May the peace of Christ be with you
Ted:-6
What I see is someone trying to proselytize on the forum. I have no problem with that but you can expect disagreements.
Secondly I see someone who seems to think they have all the right answers. It is somewhat self deluding to say the least if that is what you think.
I've never said your interpretation is wrong. I have always pointed out alternative interpretations. Since I openly admit I do not have all the answers I would never say that to anyone.
I accept full responsibility for what I post and say. I have complete trust in God.
You have tried to strive with me. jester, you don't get it. I've been where you are and I found it seriously deficient. Many others are of the same mind.
I don't believe Jesus was God. You really haven't made any effort to understand what I've been saying. Jesus was a very special man who enjoyed a very special and unique association with God. We see manifest in one Jesus of Nazareth the Nature of God as best as a human can show it and as best as a human can understand it. When you go any further you are demeaning God by trying to bring Him down to your level. I do not believe that we can grasp God in any real way. We can see and feel his activity in the world but we cannot understand the real essence of God. The best we can do is use metaphor. I am a Trinitarian. I accept the life death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. Do I understand it? Absolutely not and neither does anyone else. It is beyond our grasp as humans. At best what we can say is only metaphor because the greatness of God is beyond anything we can grasp.
Do I believe in the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus? That is one of many interpretations of his death. There are others. One thing for certain is that his death clearly showed us the unconditional love of God.
I don't say how. Do you need to be told what is injustice and what is justice? Do you need to be told what is unkindness and kindness. My heavens these things are written in your heart. You want a clear answer. If you see injustice being done anywhere you are obligated as a Christian to try to correct it. If you see unkindness and suffering anywhere you are obligated to do something about it. All of humanity are children of God. All of life including animals are sacred.
As far as salvation goes I leave that up to God. That is his purview. It is most certainly not mine or yours. How can you be sure? It is called "trust in God". When someone says to me they need the book and the history it does say something about their trust in God. Try reading the prayer I posted above. It has a good lesson worthy of note.
I don't believe evil exists??? That is a laugh. I most certainly do believe there is a power of evil in the world.
Which Bible do I read? I have many in my library. I make use of the Hebrew OT., the Greek NT., and the NRSV which is the one most recognized by those dreadful people we call scholars. It was the scholars who gave us the Bible in the first place.
If you are here to proselytize then I am not your person. I have been your way and found it deficient. If you are here to discuss and debate without guile then I am a willing participant. It makes little difference to me if you agree or disagree.
You have found my position lacking. Personally I don't care. It is no wonder since you have made no effort whatsoever to understand it. To put it concisely Christianity is a way of life. It is not about correct belief. It is a relational religion in which our relationship with God and our fellow man counts. It is a life devoted to the path that Jesus walked. A path of justice, kindness, transformation, living in a developing, transformational relationship with the Divine. It is not about "getting it right". If that were the case then no one would get it right. It is about "Trusting in God" and following in the footsteps of the Messiah. In fact those are the tenets of the basis of all of the world's great faiths.
TRUST IN GOD
May the peace of Christ be with you
Ted:-6
-
nvalleyvee
- Posts: 5191
- Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:57 am
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
and so - my thought was just cast aside. I really think Judas went to heaven. God gave Judas a job and he did it.
The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement..........Karl R. Popper
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
I did not ask you or anyone else to believe what I do. All I asked for was some understanding and from you I got nothing. Yes you are proselytizing. You made no effort whatsoever. So be it.
Whether you like it or not we are indeed all brothers and sisters. That includes the whole world.
You talk of salvation. I never said I was not certain. Once again you don't read. What I said was it is of no concern to me, that it is God's decision and I leave that up to Him. He again you are judging. sigh
Yes sir, I have been where you are and I found it, now I will be totally honest, appalling. It is to preach one small part of the Good News of Jesus Christ. It is to ignore a good deal of what he taught and lived. For me, that is wrong. You speak of the Bible but ignore a good deal of it or you add in your own provisos. i.e. When it comes to Matt 25 you have to make it say that the one going to heaven is a saved Christian. It is not there in the English and it is not there in the original Greek. You are adding to it by speculation. In fact then you are ignoring what it says just like you do in Leviticus.
I have been led by the Holy Spirit. You obviously don't believe that but I will let God be the judge. I do not have time for the legalistic games that Jesus clearly showed us in his life and example, he hated. So go about you legal games. I am busy about living the faith, which is far more than works but apparently you don't seem to understand that.
I will continue on the path that God has chosen for me.
"O God! If I worship thee in fear of Hell, burn me in Hell; and if I worship Thee in hope of Paradise, exclude me from Paradise; but if I worship Thee for Thine own sake, withhold not thine Everlasting Beauty!" pg 226, "A History of God", Karen Armstrong.
That prayer sounds much like "We love Him because He first loved us."
The fundamentalist/literalist approach leads to division, animosity, broken relationships, war, empire, imperialism, destruction etc. These our Lord Jesus Christ was totally opposed to.
"We cannot even say that God is 'good' because he is far more than anything that we can mean by 'goodness.' This is a way of excluding our imperfections from God, preventing us from projecting our hopes and desires onto him. That would create a God in our own image and likeness." pg 195, "A History of God" Karen Armstrong.
Anyway, carry on.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Ted:-6
I did not ask you or anyone else to believe what I do. All I asked for was some understanding and from you I got nothing. Yes you are proselytizing. You made no effort whatsoever. So be it.
Whether you like it or not we are indeed all brothers and sisters. That includes the whole world.
You talk of salvation. I never said I was not certain. Once again you don't read. What I said was it is of no concern to me, that it is God's decision and I leave that up to Him. He again you are judging. sigh
Yes sir, I have been where you are and I found it, now I will be totally honest, appalling. It is to preach one small part of the Good News of Jesus Christ. It is to ignore a good deal of what he taught and lived. For me, that is wrong. You speak of the Bible but ignore a good deal of it or you add in your own provisos. i.e. When it comes to Matt 25 you have to make it say that the one going to heaven is a saved Christian. It is not there in the English and it is not there in the original Greek. You are adding to it by speculation. In fact then you are ignoring what it says just like you do in Leviticus.
I have been led by the Holy Spirit. You obviously don't believe that but I will let God be the judge. I do not have time for the legalistic games that Jesus clearly showed us in his life and example, he hated. So go about you legal games. I am busy about living the faith, which is far more than works but apparently you don't seem to understand that.
I will continue on the path that God has chosen for me.
"O God! If I worship thee in fear of Hell, burn me in Hell; and if I worship Thee in hope of Paradise, exclude me from Paradise; but if I worship Thee for Thine own sake, withhold not thine Everlasting Beauty!" pg 226, "A History of God", Karen Armstrong.
That prayer sounds much like "We love Him because He first loved us."
The fundamentalist/literalist approach leads to division, animosity, broken relationships, war, empire, imperialism, destruction etc. These our Lord Jesus Christ was totally opposed to.
"We cannot even say that God is 'good' because he is far more than anything that we can mean by 'goodness.' This is a way of excluding our imperfections from God, preventing us from projecting our hopes and desires onto him. That would create a God in our own image and likeness." pg 195, "A History of God" Karen Armstrong.
Anyway, carry on.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
I can agree that we will have to agree to disagree. With that I have no problem. I still have great respect for you as a person and the vehemence of your stand. I don't agree obviously.
Do we worship a different God? I don't think so. What we have are different concepts or for that matter I have no concept of God that I can articulate. But I can say we have different concepts of the One Ultimate Reality. All I have is the experiential reality of the Divine.
Unfortunately extremism is the problem and it runs from left to right. Fundamentalist/literalism is close to the extreme right and is viewed by many as dangerous not just in Christianity but in any faith.
It is interesting that that prayer I sited is actually a Muslim prayer and it spell out what I have though for some 40 years. It says to me that if we worship God for any other reason than He is the divine we are trying to use God as an escape hatch. "Using" is the operative word. "We love Him because He first loved us.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Ted:-6
I can agree that we will have to agree to disagree. With that I have no problem. I still have great respect for you as a person and the vehemence of your stand. I don't agree obviously.
Do we worship a different God? I don't think so. What we have are different concepts or for that matter I have no concept of God that I can articulate. But I can say we have different concepts of the One Ultimate Reality. All I have is the experiential reality of the Divine.
Unfortunately extremism is the problem and it runs from left to right. Fundamentalist/literalism is close to the extreme right and is viewed by many as dangerous not just in Christianity but in any faith.
It is interesting that that prayer I sited is actually a Muslim prayer and it spell out what I have though for some 40 years. It says to me that if we worship God for any other reason than He is the divine we are trying to use God as an escape hatch. "Using" is the operative word. "We love Him because He first loved us.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
I would like to comment on the Divine or the Ultimate Reality or God if you wish. I do not believe that we can know God as He is in Himself. What we know of God here on earth is through His activities, through what He does.
The essence of God is far beyond our ken. Thus when we speak of God we must use metaphor. By trying to say that God is this or that we are trying to place the divine in a box and trying to limit Him. Thus we are in fact creating God in our image. This does not deny the reality of the God that we see manifest in Jesus of Nazareth. We can only know of God through our experiences.
What you have in the sacred scriptures are man's experiences of what he considers the Divine. The real essence of God is not available to us now but may be in some future state of reality.
These are thoughts that have come to me over the years and been supported by all of those whom I have read. The list is far to long for this post but I thank them for giving me the words to use.
Shalom
Ted
The essence of God is far beyond our ken. Thus when we speak of God we must use metaphor. By trying to say that God is this or that we are trying to place the divine in a box and trying to limit Him. Thus we are in fact creating God in our image. This does not deny the reality of the God that we see manifest in Jesus of Nazareth. We can only know of God through our experiences.
What you have in the sacred scriptures are man's experiences of what he considers the Divine. The real essence of God is not available to us now but may be in some future state of reality.
These are thoughts that have come to me over the years and been supported by all of those whom I have read. The list is far to long for this post but I thank them for giving me the words to use.
Shalom
Ted
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
Now we come the the last part, the resurrection. The fact of the matter is we do not know what the Easter event was. Whatever it was it was so profound that it has impacted history and man since that time.
The disciples, who were literally cowering in fear of their lives, felt in some very experiential way that Jesus was still alive and with them and still leading them. they changed from cowering fear to very vociferous speakers of the gospel which ultimately cost them their lives. Down through the centuries millions have had this same experience including myself. I cannot explain it nor will I try but that has been my experience. In some mysterious way this Jesus is still with us.
Anything more than this is metaphor which is fine as long as people realize that we are using metaphor to describe and experiential reality.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The disciples, who were literally cowering in fear of their lives, felt in some very experiential way that Jesus was still alive and with them and still leading them. they changed from cowering fear to very vociferous speakers of the gospel which ultimately cost them their lives. Down through the centuries millions have had this same experience including myself. I cannot explain it nor will I try but that has been my experience. In some mysterious way this Jesus is still with us.
Anything more than this is metaphor which is fine as long as people realize that we are using metaphor to describe and experiential reality.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
I have no problem with most of that highlighted area. That being said the theology of a substitutionary sacrifice is one theology of many. It is not the only one. Personally I like the word transformed but can go along with "the new life".
The rest is Paul's theology which was his take on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. As a theology it becomes metaphor for that which we by our very nature cannot express otherwise.
It does raise the question of what is sin? That is a highly disputed word which I have been doing some study on lately.
Sin is that which separates us from the love of God and the love of our fellow humans. Than we have a problem with the list. Which things separate us from both God and our fellow man? "Forgive us our trespasses (sins) as we forgive those who trespass (sin) against us."
Fellow humans includes everyone else in the world.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I have no problem with most of that highlighted area. That being said the theology of a substitutionary sacrifice is one theology of many. It is not the only one. Personally I like the word transformed but can go along with "the new life".
The rest is Paul's theology which was his take on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. As a theology it becomes metaphor for that which we by our very nature cannot express otherwise.
It does raise the question of what is sin? That is a highly disputed word which I have been doing some study on lately.
Sin is that which separates us from the love of God and the love of our fellow humans. Than we have a problem with the list. Which things separate us from both God and our fellow man? "Forgive us our trespasses (sins) as we forgive those who trespass (sin) against us."
Fellow humans includes everyone else in the world.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Jesus the man, death and resurrection
jester:-6
Now you are playing God.
You are of course still hung up on the legalism which Jesus greatly opposed by both his life and example. Of course you are also still hung up on the idea of original which is simply a non starter.
When Paul gets into theology he can only use metaphor. To do otherwise is to demean God.
If you wish to believe in a being called Satan go for it. It is simply a metaphor invented to explain evil in the world.
I have never mocked God. I accept that the greatness of God is beyond human comprehension. What we see of God is His activity in the world.
Perhaps it is you sewing discord.
The fact is that for a discussion or debate you never respond to the points I make but simply present your own understanding and perceptions. This approach is precisely what has caused so much evil and strife in the world. God wishes such evil and strife? I don't think so.
Carry on.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Now you are playing God.
You are of course still hung up on the legalism which Jesus greatly opposed by both his life and example. Of course you are also still hung up on the idea of original which is simply a non starter.
When Paul gets into theology he can only use metaphor. To do otherwise is to demean God.
If you wish to believe in a being called Satan go for it. It is simply a metaphor invented to explain evil in the world.
I have never mocked God. I accept that the greatness of God is beyond human comprehension. What we see of God is His activity in the world.
Perhaps it is you sewing discord.
The fact is that for a discussion or debate you never respond to the points I make but simply present your own understanding and perceptions. This approach is precisely what has caused so much evil and strife in the world. God wishes such evil and strife? I don't think so.
Carry on.
Shalom
Ted:-6