Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Who is Jesus Christ to you?
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 16 of 82 (37080)
04-15-2003 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by THEONE
04-15-2003 7:26 AM


Re: Jesus
quote:
TheOne's a Jew
But aren't all the Christians here too? Jesus was a Jew so aren't they just a Jewish sect?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by THEONE, posted 04-15-2003 7:26 AM THEONE has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by SharpeSworde, posted 04-15-2003 2:55 PM NosyNed has not replied
 Message 21 by John, posted 04-16-2003 10:15 AM NosyNed has replied

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5872 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 17 of 82 (37082)
04-15-2003 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by THEONE
04-15-2003 7:26 AM


Re: Jesus
Hi TheOne. I think what Andya was referring to was Sura 2, which discusses the relationship between Islam and Judaism/Christianity. There are a number of references, but one of the ones most germane (Andya can correct me if I'm wrong) is Sura 2:121 - Those people to whom We gave AL-Tawrah and AL-Injil, who read their Book with careful scrutiny in search of truth, shall recognize what really proceeded from Allah and what has been adulterated by base admixture of false glosses. Such persons shall comprehend the truth and accordingly honour the Quran. And he who refuses to acknowledge the truth proceeded from Allah shall be an inherent loser. (Translation from the Egyptian Ministry of Al Awqaf, Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs on-line Quran).
As you can plainly see, the verse is talking about the Torah and Bible having been previously given to the Jews and Christians respectively, but then corrupted. The Quran in this case is clearly shown to be without the "adulteration" and "false glosses" put by fallible men into the previous two works. IOW, Allah had been there and done that with the other religions, and they botched the message. Third time's a charm, I guess, even for a deity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by THEONE, posted 04-15-2003 7:26 AM THEONE has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 18 of 82 (37089)
04-15-2003 1:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by drummachine
04-14-2003 9:48 PM


From death to natural science
Corintians contains a verse that speaks FIRST of naturality THEN spritual up rising DEPENDENT on the Ressurection and I am tending to think that S J Gould has over depended on repentence that he missed in this flesh the difference of death by species, death by cells, death by individuals and the SPIRTUAL change expreience by a reading and understanding of these books of Paul.
Topobiology leaves a crucial mechancial role for for cell death and to the extent that this is NOT programmed, the reference of Paul to organismal flesh difference DOES refer to the natural BEOFORE God and the Spirit but that the Grace could be so confused is also NOT possible on such a reading and yet Gould continued to see Days in Genesis relative to his understanding of hoxology and yet the relgious nature of Cantors set theory has NOT been authorize as of yet he did speak in latin of "creatures"?
I have not said how I link the infinite POint beyond the complex plane to the HEAD which is also a part of the FLESH in Cornitians and a result of hoxological logos grammetology but sex bias contra Fisher is not out of thequestion of Cantors extension and USE of ACtual infinity that who knows maybe the Catholic Church HAD and is still using his call to the church to make sure it finitiely gets the proper use of infinity correct???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by drummachine, posted 04-14-2003 9:48 PM drummachine has not replied

  
SharpeSworde
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 82 (37091)
04-15-2003 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by joz
04-15-2003 11:14 AM


Re: Hey Andya...
Am not Andya but I believe I can answer some of these, being that I am somewhat familiar with the subject.
---------------------------------------------------------------------Heres a quick question, you said that you see Jesus as a messanger to "the children of Israel (exclusively)" is that Israel as in Jacob (of Jacob and Esau fame) who "wrestled with God and men"?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well the twins Jacob (Yaakov) and Esau were fighting in the womb, and after birth, but you are thinking of Isaac (Yitzhak) Jacob's father which was the one to be called Israel. He was called that after he dreamed he had wrestled with an angel of G-d and defeated him in the dream. The name also alludes ot the constant struggle of man's and G-d's will.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was under the impression that the Arabic tribes claimed descent from Abraham through Ishmael,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They do and they are. However since Ishmael had his own covenant and the Jews beleieve in relationship by covenant not blood, all muslims are thusly considered to be Ishmaelites even the ones of non-Arabic descent. I believe the Muslims identify with ishamel in that way as well. By the way the Muslims do consider Ishmael a prophet, and have tweaked the Bible to have Abraham sacrifice (well almost) Ishmael rather then Isaac. Of course the muslims claim it was either the Jews, Christians or Both that have changed their Bibles. That happens to be one of those "minor differences" between the 3 faiths.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
does this imply that they also claim to be descendants of Jacob, or is Mohammed seen as opening faith to everyone in a way that Jesus (or "Isa" right?) did not?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as I know Mohammed was an Ishmaelite, and his Islam was preached first to the Arabs but eventually was meant for the whole world, "not that the whole world would be extatic to accept the new religion".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by joz, posted 04-15-2003 11:14 AM joz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by joz, posted 04-16-2003 10:49 AM SharpeSworde has replied

  
SharpeSworde
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 82 (37092)
04-15-2003 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by NosyNed
04-15-2003 11:14 AM


Re: Jesus
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TheOne's a Jew
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But aren't all the Christians here too? Jesus was a Jew so aren't they just a Jewish sect?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Karl Marx was also born a Jew does it mean that communism is a Jewish sect? Jesus ain't Judaism plain and simple.
------------------
"It's human to err, but only a fool insist on making the same mistake twice" -- Shelomo Ha Melech

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by NosyNed, posted 04-15-2003 11:14 AM NosyNed has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 82 (37096)
04-16-2003 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by NosyNed
04-15-2003 11:14 AM


Re: Jesus
I wouldn't call Christianity a Jewish sect, despite Christianity's desperate attempts to presume the connection. Christianity is a radical departure from just about everything Jewish.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by NosyNed, posted 04-15-2003 11:14 AM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by NosyNed, posted 04-16-2003 10:49 AM John has replied
 Message 48 by drummachine, posted 04-25-2003 7:37 PM John has not replied

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 82 (37101)
04-16-2003 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by SharpeSworde
04-15-2003 2:47 PM


Re: Hey Andya...
Um I'm pretty sure it was Jacob....
quote:
Genesis 32:22 And he arose that night and took his two wives, his two female servants, and his eleven sons, and crossed over the ford of Jabbok. 23He took them, sent them over the brook, and sent over what he had. 24Then Jacob was left alone; and a Man wrestled with him until the breaking of day. 25Now when He saw that He did not prevail against him, He touched the socket of his hip; and the socket of Jacob's hip was out of joint as He wrestled with him. 26And He said, "Let Me go, for the day breaks."
But he said, "I will not let You go unless You bless me!"
27So He said to him, "What is your name?"
He said, "Jacob."
28And He said, "Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel;[2] for you have struggled with God and with men, and have prevailed."
29Then Jacob asked, saying, "Tell me Your name, I pray."
And He said, "Why is it that you ask about My name?" And He blessed him there.
30So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel:[3] "For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." 31Just as he crossed over Penuel[4] the sun rose on him, and he limped on his hip. 32Therefore to this day the children of Israel do not eat the muscle that shrank, which is on the hip socket, because He touched the socket of Jacob's hip in the muscle that shrank.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by SharpeSworde, posted 04-15-2003 2:47 PM SharpeSworde has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by SharpeSworde, posted 04-16-2003 4:15 PM joz has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 23 of 82 (37102)
04-16-2003 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by John
04-16-2003 10:15 AM


Re: Jesus
If one asked would Jesus have ever said he was anything but a Jew?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by John, posted 04-16-2003 10:15 AM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Brian, posted 04-16-2003 1:24 PM NosyNed has not replied
 Message 33 by John, posted 04-16-2003 5:27 PM NosyNed has replied

  
Andya Primanda
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 82 (37115)
04-16-2003 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by joz
04-15-2003 11:14 AM


Re: Hey Andya...
When I said that I believe that Jesus is a Messenger of Allah for the children of Israel (Bani Isra'il) my source is these Qur'anic verses:
4:171 "O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: nor say Of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah,
5:72 "They do blaspheme who say: 'Allah is Christ the son of Mary.' But said Christ: 'O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.' Whoever joins other gods with Allah- Allah will forbid hi the Garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrongdoers be no one to help.
I remembered that Sheikh Ahmed Deedat once pointed out a Biblical verse quoting Jesus saying that he only came for the children of Israel. Lets see if I can recollect that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by joz, posted 04-15-2003 11:14 AM joz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by joz, posted 04-16-2003 1:46 PM Andya Primanda has not replied
 Message 49 by drummachine, posted 04-25-2003 7:43 PM Andya Primanda has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 25 of 82 (37121)
04-16-2003 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by NosyNed
04-16-2003 10:49 AM


Re: Jesus
One thing for sure, he wouldn't have given you a straight answer!
Maybe he would have said "You will need to ask my dad"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by NosyNed, posted 04-16-2003 10:49 AM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Brad McFall, posted 04-16-2003 1:38 PM Brian has replied
 Message 50 by drummachine, posted 04-25-2003 7:45 PM Brian has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 26 of 82 (37123)
04-16-2003 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Brian
04-16-2003 1:24 PM


Re: Jesus
If Wofram can negate any positive thing Gould says about contraints then is it not both adaptive and biological to think that Gould is wrong to consider death an "epiphenomena" and would not Jesus' parabalization be NEEDED to flesh out not only the periodic cycle possiblity Gould raises with respect to the duration of species VS individual # of competitions aka Wright/Fisher but also the if any genetic homology exists for the head as well as the limb articulations?? It may indeed be that cellular automata indicate that Dobhshaky's notion of mutation genetics was mis-intuited but this does not mean that natural selection is a "smoothing" affordance as engineering is to physics. Ordinals + ordertypes are not the same as Cardinals + ordertypes.
I can not see how the aptive traingle means that Wolfram nonetheless needs to be rejected insofar as he maintains an impression about Von Neuman's contribution for he simply may have overdermined the extent of irreducible universality which DOES have something to do with perhaps MY own babtism as an epiphonmenum withint the Presbyterian Chruch but this does not mean that the Catholic Church may not have theology ready and waiting on the acutal infinite without error that Cantor made in philosophy of Leibniz that Pascal may clearly be read to have avoided. Ur else the end of the atomistic use in acutal inifinty was grasped and Anaxgorian philosophy is so relevant today Gigentn, Halpzahle, e-numbers, etc. as to Morowitz's mistake with Gish.
If the second number class IS Telsa's wireless transformer then even if electric fish are alternatively "conductors" and insulators"" it would not be scientific to think the invariance was all by constraint and not perhaps the adaptive oversight that Fisher was afraid he had made.
All of this seems true to me

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Brian, posted 04-16-2003 1:24 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Brian, posted 04-16-2003 2:07 PM Brad McFall has replied
 Message 51 by drummachine, posted 04-25-2003 7:49 PM Brad McFall has not replied

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 82 (37124)
04-16-2003 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Andya Primanda
04-16-2003 12:01 PM


Hey again Andya...
What I was trying to figure out was...
1)If "children of Israel" = descendants of Jacob.
Assuming that Jesus (Isa?) was also a messanger or prophet for Islam does this mean that...
2)a)Muslims are descendants of Jacob? I thought you identified with Ishmael?
Or
2)b)That Mohammeds message was meant for everyone regardless of ancestry in a way that you believe Jesus's message was not?
Just trying to get it straight in my little head....
I'm guessing 2)b) for now....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Andya Primanda, posted 04-16-2003 12:01 PM Andya Primanda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by SharpeSworde, posted 04-16-2003 4:23 PM joz has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 28 of 82 (37126)
04-16-2003 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Brad McFall
04-16-2003 1:38 PM


Re: Jesus
Hi,
Have you went into some kind of rabid cut and paste frenzy?
Is this a new game, see how many words you cant type before something coherent appears?
I think you have replied to about 30 people here, and decided to just throw all the answers into one reply and let us sort it out ourselves!
All of this seems true to me
It may well do, but I dont understand a word of it!
Best Wishes Brad, I take it this reply was meant for someone else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Brad McFall, posted 04-16-2003 1:38 PM Brad McFall has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Brad McFall, posted 04-16-2003 2:32 PM Brian has not replied
 Message 37 by John, posted 04-16-2003 6:12 PM Brian has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 29 of 82 (37131)
04-16-2003 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Brian
04-16-2003 2:07 PM


Re: Jesus
Oh, you may be correct, I was just tyring to follow the thread without respect to the names on this list.
But as to what is "coherent" that turns out to be just the word I am fairly certain that Gould MISWROTE for i read "inherent" where he put the "co". I still need to relate the "transition of Cantor's writing from the Grundlangen to the Beitrage in terms of point sets that seem increasingly possible to create deductive biogoegraphy from to me in Cantor's use of "sets" perfect, dense in themselves and inherent and coherent and then relate this to Gould's aptive traingle to be sure but the relation of plant and animal stays the same on this reading and only a few germs can disrupt this goove I fell i am in that works at least for me.
Well what acutally actually happened this time was that I was reading evolution stuff and got into Cantor again to notice that he had quoted Corithians and when I read BOTH books together I found that Gould's use of Paley seems so obviously wrong to me that a belief in Jesus is as easy as answering my Catholic high school freind who asked me if I grew up in India if I would rather be a Buddist than a Presby-people. Yes, I said. But I say NO to Gould.
Gould was playing for the long term and so am I. In the end we will need to hear from the Catholic Chruch again on this issue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Brian, posted 04-16-2003 2:07 PM Brian has not replied

  
SharpeSworde
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 82 (37139)
04-16-2003 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by joz
04-16-2003 10:49 AM


Re: Hey Andya...
Actually you are right I apologize, I should have looked into the scripture before I answered. (Even Einstein made mistakes *GRIN).
Thanks for a correction
Regards.
------------------
"It's human to err, but only a fool insists on making the same mistake twice" -- Shelomo Ha Melech

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by joz, posted 04-16-2003 10:49 AM joz has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024