Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 120 (8781 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-20-2017 5:39 AM
363 online now:
kbertsche, PaulK (2 members, 361 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: evilsorcerer1
Post Volume:
Total: 816,511 Year: 21,117/21,208 Month: 1,550/2,326 Week: 5/881 Day: 5/119 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
910111213
14
Author Topic:   Original Sin - Scripture and Reason
ringo
Member
Posts: 13450
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 196 of 203 (790648)
09-02-2016 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 195 by Phat
09-01-2016 3:17 PM


Re: Original Sin Remix
Phat writes:

Jesus is telling Peter that Peters revelation as to who Jesus was was not found in some story of human derived legend.


But the Gospel of Matthew itself is a story of human derived legend. Sure, it's self-consistent but is it consistent with reality? What "value" does the story have unless it can be related to reality in some way? How does Jesus being the "Son of the living God" actually relate to reality?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by Phat, posted 09-01-2016 3:17 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by Phat, posted 09-02-2016 1:01 PM ringo has responded
 Message 199 by GDR, posted 09-02-2016 2:27 PM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9581
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 197 of 203 (790650)
09-02-2016 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by ringo
09-02-2016 11:47 AM


Re: Original Sin Remix
How does Jesus being the "Son of the living God" actually relate to reality?
Depends which reality you choose to accept. How does God relate to reality?

While i may say that He is not only part of reality but created the very reality we have, I am disqualified from serious consideration by those who seek evidence.

But what if you have no evidence?

Furthermore what if evidence itself is not enough for you to worship God? What more would you ask Him for then?|

You may say that He is portrayed as a cruel uncaring tyrant. If so, why would it matter if there was evidence of his existence?

You would still reserve that little throne in your brain...where you sit, and pass judgment on Him. (Assuming that there was evidence found for His existence)

.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by ringo, posted 09-02-2016 11:47 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by ringo, posted 09-02-2016 1:21 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13450
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 198 of 203 (790651)
09-02-2016 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by Phat
09-02-2016 1:01 PM


Re: Original Sin Remix
Phat writes:

Depends which reality you choose to accept.


I should be more specific. I mean "reality" in the objective sense. What we can all agree on is "reality". Trees are reality. Weather is reality.

Phat writes:

How does God relate to reality?


By this definition, He doesn't.

Phat writes:

But what if you have no evidence?


As I've already said, if you have no evidence you're entitled to any hare-brained opinion you like. But what makes your hare-brained opinion superior to somebody else's hare-brained opinion?

Phat writes:

Furthermore what if evidence itself is not enough for you to worship God?


How could there be evidence for us to worship God? If there was incontrovertible evidence that God existed, what on earth would that have to do with worshipping Him?

Phat writes:

You may say that He is portrayed as a cruel uncaring tyrant. If so, why would it matter if there was evidence of his existence?


Huh? Isn't a real tyrant worse than an imaginary one? if you tell me there's an imminent danger that could destroy most of the people I know, don't you think I'd want to know whether it was real or imaginary?

Phat writes:

You would still reserve that little throne in your brain...where you sit, and pass judgment on Him.


You're passing judgement the same as I am. The only difference is that you're finding Him innocent, despite the testimony that you yourself give to His guilt.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Phat, posted 09-02-2016 1:01 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4262
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


(2)
Message 199 of 203 (790655)
09-02-2016 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by ringo
09-02-2016 11:47 AM


Son of God
ringo writes:

But the Gospel of Matthew itself is a story of human derived legend. Sure, it's self-consistent but is it consistent with reality? What "value" does the story have unless it can be related to reality in some way? How does Jesus being the "Son of the living God" actually relate to reality?

Actually the term Son of God is interesting. It held different meanings. On the one hand it was a messianic term for the Jews but it was also a term for the divine ruler of Rome. Julius Caesar was known as divine so when Augustus came along he declared himself son of the divine Julius or son of god.
Here is a quote from Matthew 26:

quote:
63 But Jesus remained silent. The high priest said to him, I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.

When Jesus was referred to as Messiah it meant that He was the anointed one of God to lead the Jewish people. It does not have anything to do with Him being divine. There were certain expectations of what a Messiah would do which was primarily about leading the Jewish people against the enemy and rebuilding and re-establishing the Temple. (Jesus did these things but not in the way that was commonly expected.) The point is that when we see the pre-resurrection Jesus referred to as the Son of God it is simply a messianic term as we can see in the quote that I used from Matthew.

After the resurrection it was first off a political statement. The early Jesus followers were making the political statement that Jesus was King and that Caesar wasnt. Also, though very early on it did take on a divine connotation from within a Jewish context. The Temple had always represented the place where one could go to meet Yahweh, make sacrifices, be forgiven sins and made right with God. The Temple was Gods dwelling place and the place where Gods heavenly dimension overlapped with our earthly dimension.

Jesus saw Himself and ultimately His followers as Temple replacements. He was going around forgiving sins and saying things like I desire mercy not sacrifice. He preached about rebelling against evil with love as opposed to the violent overthrow of Roman rule that so many hoped for. In addition the book of Daniel was closely followed at that time, and in Daniel 7 the Son of Man, as Jesus often referred to Himself, is presented to the ancient of Days , or Yahweh, and given dominion and power over the Earthly Kingdom. The early Jesus followers saw Jesus as embodying Yahwehs return to His people and perfectly embodying the nature of God and Gods desire for His creation, and that then God had enthroned Him. It was through this that very early on the term Son of God did represent the divine aspect of the man Jesus the Messiah to His followers.

In terms of relating it to reality it all hangs on the resurrection. If there is no resurrection then Jesus is simply a delusional human who in spite of that still came up with a nice message of peace and love. However, the Christian faith is based on the belief that God did resurrect Jesus, thus vindicating and confirming the life and message of Jesus, or as the Gospel of John puts it, the Word or Wisdom of God became flesh. If this is the case, then the reality is that we do have a God and we are called to take His message as embodied by Jesus to heart, and base our lives on His message of love, peace, forgiveness, truth, kindness, charity etc, and to take that message to the world.

Edited by GDR, : not enough time to proof read it initially

Edited by GDR, : No reason given.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by ringo, posted 09-02-2016 11:47 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by ringo, posted 09-03-2016 11:44 AM GDR has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13450
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 200 of 203 (790683)
09-03-2016 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 199 by GDR
09-02-2016 2:27 PM


Re: Son of God
GDR writes:

If there is no resurrection then Jesus is simply a delusional human who in spite of that still came up with a nice message of peace and love.


I don't even believe that Jesus existed but your attitude really grates on me. If He did exist, why couldn't He just be a wise man who was misunderstood and/or misrepresented? If somebody worships Tom Hanks as the saviour of mankind, does that make Tom Hanks delusional?

GDR writes:

If this is the case, then the reality is that we do have a God and we are called to take His message as embodied by Jesus to heart, and base our lives on His message of love, peace, forgiveness, truth, kindness, charity etc, and to take that message to the world.


But why do you need a god to give you that message when other people seem to get the same message without any resurrection, even without any god at all? How is the resurrection related to reality when others get the same reality without the resurrection? You're just adding an unnecessary subjective element to reality.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by GDR, posted 09-02-2016 2:27 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by Faith, posted 09-03-2016 2:52 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply
 Message 202 by GDR, posted 09-05-2016 12:30 PM ringo has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 25851
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 201 of 203 (790693)
09-03-2016 2:52 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by ringo
09-03-2016 11:44 AM


Re: Son of God
GDR writes:

... the reality is that we do have a God and we are called to take His message as embodied by Jesus to heart, and base our lives on His message of love, peace, forgiveness, truth, kindness, charity etc, and to take that message to the world.

But why do you need a god to give you that message when other people seem to get the same message without any resurrection, even without any god at all?

Thank you. I agree completely. I don't agree with much you have to say but I certainly agree that GDR's view of why Jesus came is utterly silly for the reason you give among other reasons.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by ringo, posted 09-03-2016 11:44 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4262
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 202 of 203 (790788)
09-05-2016 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by ringo
09-03-2016 11:44 AM


Re: Son of God
Ringo writes:

I don't even believe that Jesus existed but your attitude really grates on me. If He did exist, why couldn't He just be a wise man who was misunderstood and/or misrepresented? If somebody worships Tom Hanks as the saviour of mankind, does that make Tom Hanks delusional?


Tom Hanks isnt going around making messianic claims or saying that he can forgive sin on Gods behalf. If Jesus was simply a good man it would make more sense to be followers of Gandhi who preached a similar message and it didnt make all of those claims about himself.
Ringo writes:

But why do you need a god to give you that message when other people seem to get the same message without any resurrection, even without any god at all? How is the resurrection related to reality when others get the same reality without the resurrection? You're just adding an unnecessary subjective element to reality.


But that isnt the whole point. Christianity has always had the two aspects to it. The first is what we have been talking about. Jesus modeled and taught how we are to live our lives, and that message is all about loving and caring for others and for that matter all of creation. Yes that message existed before the resurrection and without the resurrection. Paul says this in Romans 2:
quote:
13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in Gods sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.
14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law.
15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)
16 This will take place on the day when God judges peoples secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

Jesus had said that all of the law is based on the law of love. Paul is saying in verse 14 that it is those who by their nature, (or heart) that obey the law of love that are
right with God. He doesnt mention what doctrine we adhere to.

The other aspect of Christianity though is all about the resurrection and is what differentiates Christianity form all other faiths. Firstly, as I already mentioned it does confirm Jesus message of love, peace, forgiveness mercy etc as being of God and representing His true nature.

The resurrection also is a message that evil and death does not have the last word. Mankind can do its worst, as it did to Jesus, and then a new day dawned. The first disciples had gone into hiding not wanting to be associated with Jesus as they were afraid that they would suffer the same fate. After the resurrection they fearlessly took Christs message to the world. Interestingly enough was that some like Jesus brother James, and Paul for that matter, who had not been followers of Jesus prior to the resurrection, were leaders in the early church.

There is of course also the message that if we become followers of Jesus, (which means more than simply giving intellectual ascent to some doctrine), then He will change our hearts.
Paul also writes this in Ephesians 1:

quote:
9 he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ,
10 to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillmentto bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.

Here is a quote from Matthew 19:
quote:
28 Jesus said to them, Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

The resurrection of all things is Gods plan for the future. The resurrection shows us that our lives have ultimate meaning and an eternal purpose. If then earth is part of that renewal when our earthly dimension and Gods heavenly dimension come together to make up the whole of reality that we only perceive our part of now, then we can also know that the good that we do now does matter eternally. When we sacrificially love others it has eternal ramifications. It also shows that we are to care for other life and for the planet itself as it isnt going to ultimately wind up a dead useless place.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by ringo, posted 09-03-2016 11:44 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by ringo, posted 09-06-2016 12:07 PM GDR has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13450
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 203 of 203 (790835)
09-06-2016 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 202 by GDR
09-05-2016 12:30 PM


Re: Son of God
GDR writes:

Tom Hanks isnt going around making messianic claims or saying that he can forgive sin on Gods behalf.


That isn't what I said. I said that if somebody believed Tom Hanks was the Messiah, they would be delusional, not him.

GDR writes:

If Jesus was simply a good man it would make more sense to be followers of Gandhi who preached a similar message and it didnt make all of those claims about himself.


I agree. It does make more sense to follow Gandhi.

GDR writes:

The other aspect of Christianity though is all about the resurrection and is what differentiates Christianity form all other faiths.


It's what makes Christianity worse than other faiths - the need for God incarnate to be the example when we have better examples like Gandhi (who never destroyed the earth with a flood). And the need for that incarnation to die and resurrect is just bizarre and unnecessary.

GDR writes:

The resurrection shows us that our lives have ultimate meaning and an eternal purpose.


Another strike against it. "Ultimate meaning and purpose", if it means anything at all, is just an excuse for avoiding our real meaning and purpose which is earthly, not heavenly.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by GDR, posted 09-05-2016 12:30 PM GDR has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
910111213
14
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017